Dismissed¶11

M/Sunited India Insurance Com. Ltd. v. Krishna Kumar Agarwal

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2022FAFO/857/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicability of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 vis-à-vis Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 where the insurance policy predates the new Act but the accident occurred after its commencement; insurer's appeal against Rs.30,000 MACT award with 12% interest; limited liability plea raised but not decided; United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krishna Kumar Agarwal; FAO No. 857 of 1993, Allahabad High Court, decided 8.7.2022 (Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.).

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; the amount, if not yet deposited, shall be deposited and, if deposited, paid to the claimant forthwith. ¶11

M/Sunited India Insurance Com. Ltd. Vs Krishna Kumar… — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 857 of 1993

¶3

Appellant :- M/Sunited India Insurance Com. Ltd. Respondent :- Krishna Kumar Agarwal Counsel for Appellant :- Vishnu Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- R.P. Agarwal

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

¶5

Heard Sri N.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for appellantInsurance Company which was earlier represented by Sri Vipin Chandra Srivastva, learned Advocate and despite the fact that several years have elapsed, no new Advocate has filed his vakalatnama, hence, we appoint Sri N.K. Srivastava, learned Advocate as Amicus Curiae to the assist the Court.

¶6

By way of this appeal, the appellant-Insurance Company has challenged the judgment and award dated 23.4.1993 passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in M.A.C No. 50 of 1990 Bareilly awarding Rs.30,000/- to the claimant with interest at the rate of 12%.

¶7

On the smallness of amount and the fact that only Rs.30,000/has been awarded for pain, shock and suffering, this appeal requires to be dismissed.

¶8

The legal point involved is that the matter should have been decided under the old Act i.e. Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 as the policy was taken on 12.10.1988 whereas the new Act i.e. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force on 1.7.1989. It is submitted that the Tribunal has ignored the issue of limited liability.

¶9

The issue before this Court is that as accident took place on 5.9.1989 i.e. after the new Act came into force and whether the Tribunal was under an obligation to decide the matter under the old Act which is against the policy which was under the old Act.

¶10

The old policy under the old Act may have been taken but the matter would be governed by the new Act once the accident took place after the commencement of the Act. Hence, this submission of the learned counsel for Insurance Company that it was governed by old Act will not enure for the benefit of the appellant.

¶11

In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed.

¶12

The amount if yet not deposited, the same shall be deposited and if deposited, the amount be paid to the claimant forthwith.

¶13

Order Date :- 8.7.2022 DKS

¶14

Digitally signed by DEEPAK KUMAR SRIVASTWA Date: 2022.07.13 10:42:46 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

M/Sunited India Insurance Com. Ltd. v. Krishna Kumar Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/Sunited India Insurance Com. Ltd. v. Krishna Kumar Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D. Chaturvedi and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yunus Alias Kala and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Chand and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Kapoor Vs Krishna Singh

Jagannath and Others Vs Som Nath Vaish and Others

Surendra Kumar Jain and Another Vs Gurubachan Singh and Others