Appeal by United India Insurance Company against Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award dismissing appeal. Court found no illegality in award. Appeal dismissed with statutory amount remitted to Tribunal.
Statutory amount deposited remitted to Tribunal for adjustment against award.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 436 of 2011
Appellant :- United India Insurance Compay Thru' Branch Manager Respondent :- Rashida Bano & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh,Rahul Chaudhary,Ramesh Chandra Pathak
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Ref:- Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 90557 of 2011
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Cause shown for delay in filing the appeal is sufficient. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
The delay condonation application is allowed.
Order Date :- 20.7.2018 Atmesh
Court No. - 26
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 436 of 2011
Appellant :- United India Insurance Compay Thru' Branch Manager Respondent :- Rashida Bano & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh,Rahul Chaudhary,Ramesh Chandra Pathak
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Amit Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rahul Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent no.5, Sri Ramesh Chandra Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-respondents and perused the record.
This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the judgment and award dated 04.11.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Basti, in M.A.C.P. No. 122 of 2004, whereby compensation of Rs.1,79,500/- has been awarded to the claimants-respondents.
The facts of the case are that on 26.9.2003 the claimant Rashida Bano along with her husband Mahboob Alam and other family members were going from Etawa to Basti on a Jeep bearing Registration No. UP-51 C-9770 which was being driven by its driver Vijay Kumar. When the jeep arrived near Police Station Chhavani, the driver lost his control over the vehicle in question due to rash and negligent driving and hit the truck from behind which was standing on the left side of the road and the driver jumped off while the vehicle was in motion, resultantly, her husband Mahboob Alam, son- Mohd. Alam and Sayed Abdul Hameed died on the spot and other family members sustained grievous injuries.
From the perusal of the award, I find that the Tribunal has come to record a categorical finding of fact that the driver of the tortfeasor vehicle was not in possession of a valid driving license at the time of the accident in question and, accordingly, the right to recovery has been given to the Insurance Company that the compensation to be paid first by the Insurance Company as the vehicle in question was duly insured.
In view of the fact that once the Tribunal has issued direction giving right to recovery of the amount to be paid as
compensation under award, I do not find any illegality in the award that can be said to be prejudicial to the interest of the appellant.
It is always open to the appellant to get the amount of compensation recovered from the owner and the driver as per the directions issued by the Tribunal and the appellant is not able to demonstrate as to whether any such appeal has been preferred by the owner or the driver of the vehicle in which directions issued by the Tribunal has been stayed or set aside.
Thus, the appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
The statutory amount, however, already deposited before this Court shall be remitted to the Tribunal for being adjusted against the compensation to be made under the award.
Order Date :- 20.7.2018 Atmesh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal challenging the award of compensation to accident victims lacks merit.
Whether the insurance company is liable to pay compensation directly when the Tribunal directed recovery from the owner or driver.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
United India Insurance Company
Rashida Bano and Others
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
