Allowed

The Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd v. Kumari Laxmibai Mallappa Hanapur

Karnataka HC27 Aug 2019MFA/22722/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals by an insurer against compensation awards granted by the Labour Commissioner. The Court allowed the appeals, holding that the insurer is not liable for injuries sustained by passengers in an uninsured trailer being towed by an insured tractor, modifying the award to place full liability on the trailer owner.

What did the court decide?

Appeals allowed; modification of award to fasten entire liability on respondent 3 (owner of trailer) and refund of amount deposited by insurer.

The Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd Vs… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶5

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22727/2009 (WC) C/w

¶6

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22722/2009 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22723/2009 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22725/2009 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22726/2009 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.22724/2009

¶7

MFA NO.22727/2009

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NOW R/AT: ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052.

¶10

... APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

¶12

AND

¶13

1A. SRI. MALLAPPA LAXMAN HANAPUR

¶14

1B. SMT. SHANKARAMMA MALLAPPA HANAPUR

¶15

1C. KUMARI LAXMIBAI MALLAPPA HANAPUR

¶16

ALL R/O: KERAKALMATTI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶17

SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶18

¶19

R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶20

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶21

... RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3 NOTICE TO R1(A-C) NOT ORDERED)

¶23

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA NO.362/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.3,11,970/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT.

¶24

MFA NO.22722/2009

¶25

BETWEEN :

¶26

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052.

¶27

... APPELLANT

¶28

(BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

¶29

AND

¶30

KUMARI LAXMIBAI MALLAPPA HANAPUR REP. BY MINOR GUARDIAN SMT. YELLAWWA BHIMAPPA SAVANDATTI

¶31

¶32

R/O: HAWALAKODA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶33

SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶34

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶35

... RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3 NOTICE TO R1 NOT ORDERED)

¶37

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30(1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA/NF NO.435/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.3,11,970/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.

¶38

MFA NO.22723/2009

¶39

BETWEEN :

¶40

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052.

¶41

... APPELLANT

¶42

(BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

¶43

¶44

AND

¶45

SMT. RUKAMAWWA BASAPPA PADIMANI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HAWALAKODA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶46

SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶47

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶48

(BY SRI. SACHIN S.MAGADUM, ADV. FOR R1 SRI N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶49

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30 (1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA.NF. NO.436/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.95,305/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.

¶50

MFA NO.22725/2009 BETWEEN :

¶51

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052. (BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

... APPELLANT

AND

SMT. YELLAWWA LAXMAPPA APPANAVAR AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HAWALAKODA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶56

SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶57

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶58

(BY SRI. SACHIN S.MAGADUM, ADV. FOR R1 SRI N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶59

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30 (1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA.NF. NO.438/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,31,027/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.

¶60

MFA NO.22726/2009 BETWEEN :

¶61

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052. (BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

... APPELLANT

AND

SMT. THIPAWWA BHIMAPPA PATIL AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HAWALAKODA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶66

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶67

(BY SRI. SACHIN S.MAGADUM, ADV. FOR R1 SRI N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶68

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30 (1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA.NF. NO.439/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,59,618/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.

¶69

MFA NO.22724/2009

¶70

BETWEEN :

¶71

THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ESS UNIT, KSCMF BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, 3^RD BLOCK, # 8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560052. (BY SRI. RAVINDRA A.CHOUGALE, ADV.)

... APPELLANT

AND

SMT. PADDAWWA NINGAPPA DANDIN AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HAWALAKODA, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶76

SRI. YAMANURSAB HAJISAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶77

SMT. FATIMA W/O: YAMANURSAB NADAF, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENUR, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶78

(BY SRI. SACHIN S.MAGADUM, ADV. FOR R1 SRI N.SHANKAR RANGREJI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶79

THIS MFA FILED U/S.30 (1) OF THE WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.03.2009 IN WCA.NF. NO.437/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER & COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, BAGALKOT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,68,463/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% P.A.

¶80

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶81

¶82

JUDGMENT

¶83

Though these appeals came up before this Court

¶84

for admission, with the consent of counsel appearing on both sides, they heard finally.

¶85

All these appeals are filed by the insurer

¶86

assailing the judgment and award dated 26.03.2009 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Bagalkot, Dist: Bagalkot, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commissioner’, for short) in WCA Nos.362/2007, 435/2007, 436/2007, 438/2007, 439/2007 and 437/2007 respectively.

¶87

Since all the appeals arise out of the

¶88

common order passed by the Commissioner, they are taken up together for disposal in order to avoid repetition.

¶89

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant Insurer as well as the respondentsclaimants.

¶90

¶91

Commissioner is retained for convenience.

¶92

The claimants have filed these petitions before the Commissioner claiming compensation of Rs.3,11,970/-, Rs.95,305/-, Rs.1,31,027/-,

¶93

Rs.1,59,618/- and Rs.1,68,463/- respectively interalia contending that on 22.06.2007 one Siddavva in WCA No.362/2007, who is deceased and other claimants are injured were all traveling in a tractor and trailer bearing registration No.KA-29/T-3139 and trailer bearing registration No.KA-29/T-2051, as per the directions of the owner of the tractor and trailer, the deceased and other claimants were loaded the tractor with manure and while returning back in that trailer, the vehicle was met with an accident, due to which Siddavva sustained injuries and died. Whereas, the other claimants were sustained injuries. Hence, filed the claim petitions.

¶94

In pursuance to the notice, respondent

¶95

Nos.1 owner of the tractor and respondent No.3 owner

¶96

¶97

of the trailer were appeared before the Commissioner,

¶98

but not filed any objections. Whereas the respondent No.2-insurer filed objections by denying the relationship of the claimants with respondent No.1 and 3, as they have not employees of them. Further, it was taken contention the claimants and deceased were traveled in the trailer as a gratuitous passenger and un-authorized passenger in the goods vehicle which was not covered in the policy. Further it has taken contention that the trailer was not insured that the insurance Company as on the date of the accident. Hence, prayed for dismissing the claim petitions against the insurer. Based upon the rival pleadings, the Commissioner framed the following issues;

¶99

¥Àæ.¸ÀA.qÀ§Æè¹.J¥sï-435,362, J£ïJ¥sï-436,437,438 & 439/2007

¶100

ªÀÄÈvÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 2 jAzÀ 5£ÉÃ CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ 1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 3£ÉÃ ¥ÀæwªÁ¢UÀ¼À ªÁºÀ£ÀzÀ°® PÀÆ°UÀ¼ÉAzÀÄ ¸ÉÃªÁ ¤gÀvÀgÁVzÁÝUÀ PÉ®¸ÀzÀ ªÉÃ¼É, PÉ®¸ÀzÀ ¥ÀjuÁªÀÄ¢AzÀ GAmÁzÀ C¥ÀWÁvÀzÀ°è ªÀÄÈvÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄgÀtÂ¹ 2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 5£ÉÃ CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ±Á±ÀévÀ CAUÀ£ÀÆå£ÀvÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄªÀÅzÁV

¶101

¶102

¶103

1. CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ªÀÄÈvÀ½UÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 5£ÉÃ CfðzÁgÀjUÉ C¥ÀWÁvÀzÀ PÁ®zÀ°è 30 ªÀµÀð, 23,30,30 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 35 ªÀµÀð ªÀAiÀÄ¸ÁìVvÀÄÛ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 1 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 3£ÉÃ ¥ÀæwªÁ¢UÀ½AzÀ ¢£ÀPÉÌ gÀÆ. 150/- ¸ÀA§¼À ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛzÀÝgÉAzÀÄ ¸Á©ÃvÀÄ¥Àr¸ÀÄªÀgÉ?

¶104

1. CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ C¥ÀWÁvÀ¢AzÁV ªÉÊAiÀÄÄQÛPÀ ºÁ¤UÁV ¥ÀjºÁgÀ ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ®Ä CºÀðgÉ? ºÁVzÀÝ°è ¥ÀjºÁgÀzÀ ªÉÆvÀÛªÉµÀÄÖ? ºÁUÀÆ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä AiÀiÁgÀÄ ¨ÁzsÀå¸ÀÜgÀÄ?

¶105

1. CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ¥ÀjºÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É zÀAqÀ ºÁUÀÆ §rØUÉ CºÀðgÉ? ºÁVzÀÝ°è zÀAqÀ ºÁUÀÆ §rØAiÀÄ ªÉÆvÀÛªÉµÀÄÖ? ºÁUÀÆ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä AiÀiÁgÀÄ ¨ÁzsÀå¸ÀÜgÀÄ?

¶106

1. DzÉÃ±ÀªÉÃ£ÀÄ?

¶107

To substantiate their contention, the

¶108

claimant themselves as PWs.1 to 4 and also examined one doctor PW.5 who issued the disability certificate and got marked totally 28 documents. On behalf of respondent-insurer RW.1 examined and no documents were marked.

¶109

After considering the evidence on record, the Commissioner allowed the petitions by awarding compensation as follows:

¶110

¶111

WCA Case Nos.435/2007 & 362/2007
Deceased Salary at the Rs. 3000/-
time of accidentÀ
Deceased age at the time of 30 Years
accident
Relevant Factor = 3,11,970/-
50 x 3000 x 207.98
100
(Rupees Three Lakh Eleven Thousand Nine
Hundred Seventy only)
In total, the applicants are entitled for the
compensation of Rs. 3,11,970/-.

¶112

WCA Case Nos.436/2007
Applicant’s Salary at the time of Rs. 3000/-
accident
Applicant’s age at the time of 28 Years
accident
Relevant Factor 211.79
Loss of earning capacity 25%
60 x 3000 x 211.79 x 25
100 100 = 95,305/-
(Rupees Ninety Five Thousand Three Hundred and
Five only)
In total, the applicants are entitled for the
compensation of Rs.95,305/-

¶113

¶114

WCA Case Nos.437/2007
Applicant’s Salary at the time of Rs. 3000/-
accident
Applicant’s age at the time of 30 Years
accident
Relevant Factor 207.98
Loss of earning capacity 45%
60 x 3000 x 207.98 x 25 = 1,68,463/-
100 100
(Rupees One Lakh Sixty Eighty Thousand Four
Hundred and Sixty Three only)
In total, the applicants are entitled for the
compensation of Rs.1,68,463/-

¶115

WCA Case Nos.438/2007
Applicant’s Salary at the time of Rs. 3000/-
accident
Applicant’s age at the time of 30 Years
accident
Relevant Factor 207.98
Loss of earning capacity 35%
60 x 3000 x 207.98 x 25 = 1,31,027/-
100 100
(Rupees One Lakh Thirty One Thousand and
Twenty Seven only)
In total, the applicants are entitled for the
compensation of Rs.1,31,027/-

¶116

¶117

WCA Case Nos.439/2007
Applicant’s Salary at the time of accident	Rs. 3000/-
Applicant’s age at the time of accident	35 Years
Relevant Factor	197.06
Loss of earning capacity 45	%
60 x 3000 x 197.06 x45 = 100 100	1,59,618/-
(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Nine Thous Hundred andEighteenonly)	and Six
In total, the applicants are entitled compensationof Rs.1,31,027/-	for the

¶118

Assailing the judgment and award passed by the Commissioner, the insurer filed these appeals fastening the liability of 50% on the Insurance Company.

¶119

The counsel for the appellant insurer contended that though initially they have challenged relationship of the claimant deceased with respondent No.1 and 3 in respect of jural relationship of employee and employer however they have not challenged the

¶120

¶121

findings in respect of jural relationship fastening the liability on the insurer in respect of non-coverage of insurance for the trailer in question. The learned counsel further contended that though the tractor bearing registration No.KA-29/T-3139 was covered with the insurance policy but the trailer belongs to respondent No.3 bearing registration No.KA-29/T-2051 was not covered with the insurance policy, the same was brought before the Commissioner but the Commissioner not properly considered and fastened the liability of 50% on the insurance company which is against the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Oriental Insurance

¶122

Company Limited, Bangalore Vs D. Laxman and

¶123

Others, reported in 2007(4) Kar.L.J. 224 (DB) and hence prayed for dismissal of the claim petitions by allowing the appeals filed by the Insurer.

¶124

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents both owner as well as the claimants

¶125

¶126

supported the judgment and award passed by the Commissioner and contended that though the tractor is insured with respondent No.2-Insurance Company but the trailer was not covered with the insurance policy. However, the trailer cannot be moved as on its own without pulling of the tractor. Therefore, the Commissioner rightly held 50% of liability fastened on the insurer in respect of tractor and absolved the Insurance Company for 50% in respect of the trailer. Therefore, there is no error or illegality committed by the Commissioner by fastening the liability of 50% on the Insurer. Hence, prayed for dismissing the appeals.

¶127

After hearing the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the award passed by the Commissioner which shows the accident dated 22.06.2007 that was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor and trailer bearing registration No.KA-29/T-3139 and KA-29/T-2051. Due to which the claimants and one

¶128

¶129

Siddavva who was traveled in the tractor and trailer as coolies were sustained injuries and Siddavva was died due to the injuries sustained by her in the accident and the same was not in dispute. Though, initially the insurer challenged the jural relationship as well as the claimants who are said to be passengers in the goods vehicle not covered under the policy. However, in the appeals, they restricted the arguments only in respect of liability that was fastened on the Insurer for noncoverage of the insurance policy in respect of trailer of the tractor. The findings of the Commissioner at page No.13 , wherein the Commissioner held as per Ex.P27(a) the insurance policy has been issued by the respondent No.2 with cover note No.33903119 which was in force from 22.11.2006 to 21.11.2007 and there was no insurance policy obtained by the respondent No.3 in respect of the trailer in question whether these claimants and deceased Siddavva were traveled. The Commissioner clearly held that there is no policy

¶130

¶131

coverage in respect of the trailer but only the tractor has covered the policy issued by respondent No.2 as per Ex.28(a). However, the Commissioner stated 50% of the liability is fastened on the owner of the trailer and 50% on the owner of the tractor and fastened the liability on the insurance company.

¶132

The Division Bench judgment of this Court in the identical case of Oriental Insurance Company

¶133

Limited, Bangalore Vs D. Laxman and Others, reported in 2007(4) Kar.L.J. 224 (DB) at paragraph Nos.9, 22 and 33 held as under;

¶134

9. In our opinion, the only issue that would arise for our consideration and decision in this appeal is, whether the Insurance Company can be made liable to pay the compensation in respect of the coolies carried in a vehicle, which is not covered by the insurance policy?

¶135

22. Section 146 of the Act obligates the owners of a ‘vehicle’ to insure their vehicles

¶136

¶137

against third party risks. If such insurance is there for the vehicle, then only, if the vehicle meets with an accident, compensation could be claimed either by the persons insured or by the persons, who have injured or expired. Therefore, in our opinion, the Commissioner was not justified in coming to a conclusion, that, merely because the tractor was insured and though the trailer was not insured, even then, if the tractor meets with an accident along with the trailer, the coolies traveling in the trailer can claim compensation and compensation requires to be paid.

¶138

33. In view of the above, our answer to the issue that we have raised for our consideration is, that for the coolies carried in a trailer which is not covered by a insurance policy, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation. Incidentally, we wish to notice that the owner of the vehicle has not filed any appeals before this Court against the impugned order.

¶139

¶140

In view of the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court stated supra, the trailer also required policy to cover the deceased or injured claimants for seeking compensation from the insurance company. Though the tractor belongs to respondent No.1 covered with the insurance policy but the trailer belongs to respondent No.3 was not at all covered with the insurance policy. Therefore, the question of fastening the liability of 50% on the respondent No.3 and 50% on the Insurance Company along with respondent No.1 is not correct. Hence, the award passed by the tribunal in respect of fastening the 50% of the liability on the Insurance Company is liable to be set aside and the entire compensation is liable to be payable by respondent No.3 who is owner of the trailer.

¶141

Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Insurer deserved to be allowed. Hence the appeal Nos.22727/2009, 22722/2009, 22723/2009, 22725/2009, 22726/2009 and 22724/2009 are

¶142

¶143

allowed. In respect of fastening the liability of 50% on the Insurer is hereby modified and the entire liability is fastened on the respondent No.3 the owner of the trailer and respondent No.3 owner of tractor is liable to pay the entire compensation.

¶144

The amount in deposit made by the insurer is directed to be refunded with due identification.

¶145

Send the LCR with copy of the judgment to the concerned Court forthwith.

¶146

Sd/JUDGE

¶147

msr

The Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd v. Kumari Laxmibai Mallappa Hanapur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd v. Kumari Laxmibai Mallappa Hanapur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Sujata W/O Gopalrao Kulkarni Vs Sri. Shivappa Kallappa Kotagi

N Sreenivasa Rao S/O. Nagayya Vs B T Philip S/O. Babu

Akbar S/O Bavasab Gadag, Vs Fakkirappa S/O Siddappa Metri

The Branch Manager, Vs Rachappa S/O. Yallappa Akki

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mydlyappa S/O Sann Kumarappa

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Pompapathy S/O Sanna Kumarappa