Telangana High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Burra Suvarna And 2 Others on 20 January, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
M.A.C.M.A No.243 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the award passed by the learned X
Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court),
Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad (for short 'the
tribunal') in M.V.O.P.No.903 of 2008, dated 18.09.2013,
United India Insurance Company preferred this appeal.
2. Heard Sri C.Narender Reddy, learned counsel for the
appellant and Sri M.Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for
respondent No.1.
3. Brief facts of the case:
3.1. On 07.02.2008, respondent No.1 was traveling in Tata
Sumo bearing No.AP 24 U 6444, along with her relatives
towards Choutuppal and when they reached the outskirts of
Dharmajigudem Village on NH-9, the driver drove the Tata
Sumo in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the
container vehicle bearing No.TN 04 B 5963, which was
coming from opposite side. As a result, the Tata Sumo turned
turtle and all the inmates fell down and respondent No.1
2 JSR,J
MACMA_243_2014
sustained injuries on her left eye and all other parts of the
body.
4. Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant-
Insurance Company:
4.1. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company
submits that the accident was occurred due to rash and
negligent driving of driver of Tata Sumo and the subject
vehicle is carrying more passengers than permitted capacity.
In such circumstances, the tribunal ought to have granted
compensation against respondent No.2, owner of Tata Sumo
and not against the appellant-Insurance Company. He further
submits that the tribunal, in the absence of any evidence,
granted compensation of an amount of Rs.92,500/-.
5. Submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.1:
5.1. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.1 submits that the tribunal after considering the oral and
documentary evidence on record has rightly granted
compensation in favour of respondent No.1 and there are no
grounds in the appeal.
3 JSR,J
MACMA_243_2014
6. Analysis:
6.1. This Court considered the rival submissions made by
the respective parties and perused the record. It is not in
dispute that respondent No.1 sustained injuries due to rash
and negligent driving of driver of Tata Sumo. The record
discloses that respondent No.1 sustained blunt injury to her
pelvis, on the back and on the left side of the eye at cornea.
PW-2 in his evidence specifically stated that the injuries
sustained by respondent No.1 are grievous in nature. The
record further discloses that respondent No.1 initially treated
at Government Hospital, Choutuppal and thereafter, she was
shifted to S.V.Hospitals, Balapur X Road. The tribunal after
taking into consideration of Exs.A1 to A4, held that the
accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of
driver of Tata Sumo and taking into consideration of Exs.A5
to A10 and evidence of PWs.1 and 2, rightly awarded an
amount of Rs.92,500/-. Hence, this Court does not find any
ground to interfere with the impugned award passed by the
tribunal.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. No costs.
4 JSR,J
MACMA_243_2014
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
______________________________
JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
Date : 20.01.2025
vsl
