Dismissed

United India Insurance Company Thru Branch Manager v. Rashida Bano and Others

Allahabad HC20 Jul 2018FAFOD/437/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Coram dismissed an appeal filed by United India Insurance Company against an award of Rs. 1.54 lakh by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Court held the appeal lacked merit as the alleged illegality went to the victim and recovery could still be had from the owner and driver. The deposited amount was remitted to the Tribunal for adjustment.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed and the deposited statutory amount is remitted to the Tribunal for adjustment against the compensation.

United India Insurance Company Thru Branch Manager… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 26

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 437 of 2011

¶3

Appellant :- United India Insurance Company Thru' Branch Manager Respondent :- Rashida Bano & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh,Ramesh Chandra Pathak

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Ref:- Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Cause shown for delay in filing the appeal is sufficient. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

¶8

The delay condonation application is allowed.

¶9

Order Date :- 20.7.2018 Atmesh

¶10

Court No. - 26

¶11

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER DEFECTIVE No. - 437 of 2011

¶12

¶13

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶14

Heard Sri Amit Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rahul Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 as well as Sri Ramesh Chandra Pathak, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-respondents and perused the material placed on record.

¶15

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. 121 of 2004, whereby compensation of Rs.1,54,500/- has been awarded to the claimants-respondents.

¶16

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 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.

¶17

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 with the rider that the compensation to be paid first by the Insurance Company as the vehicle in question was duly insured.

¶18

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 the award, I do not find any illegality in the award that can be said to be prejudicial to the interest of the appellant.

¶19

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.

¶20

Thus, the appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 20.7.2018 Atmesh

United India Insurance Company Thru Branch Manager v. Rashida Bano and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Company Thru Branch Manager v. Rashida Bano and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Giri Goswami Vs M/S Shri Ram General Insurance Co. Ltd. and 3 Others

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Amerjahan and Another

Dharmendra Yadav Vs Smt. Chandra Devi and 7 Others

Sriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Vs Smt. Daya and 3 Others

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Vimla and Others

United India Insurance Compay Thru Branch Manager Vs Rashida Bano and Others