The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Shakunthalamma

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., MOTOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS HUB, NO.9, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY MANAGER.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR C.R, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

SMT. SHAKUNTHALAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS W/O SRI. VASU @ CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, C/O SRI.T. MUNIKRISHNAPPA, NO.444, NARASIMHAIAH LAYOUT, KADUGONDANAHALLI, BANGALORE

¶17

ALSO AT NO.112, NIDGURKI VILLAGE, SANTHEKALLAHALLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:38135 MFA No. 1630 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 1631 of 2019

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

SRI. VEERACHARI @ BHADRACHARI S/O SRI. NAGALINGA CHARI, R/AT SANTHEKALLAHALLI VILLAGE, CHITAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. (OWNER OF TATA SUMO)

¶21

SRI. MOULAS S/O SRI. SYED NAZEER AHMED, R/AT RAMA MANDIRA STREET, VIJAYAPURA, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. (INSURED OF TATA SUMO)

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. B.C. THIPPESWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 AND R3 SERVED)

¶24

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06/07/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.73/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., AND MACT, CHINTHAMANI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,00,100/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED.

¶25

IN MFA NO. 1631/2019

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., MOTOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS HUB, NO.9, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY MANAGER.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38135 MFA No. 1630 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 1631 of 2019

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

...APPELLANT

¶31

(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR C.R, ADVOCATE)

¶32

AND:

¶33

SMT. MAMATHA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS W/O SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY, C/O SRI. T. MUNIKRISHNAPPA, NO,.444, NARASIMHAIAH LAYOUT, KADUGONDANAHALLI, BANGALORE.

¶34

SRI. VEERACHARI @ BHADRACHARI, S/O SRI. NAGALINGA CHARI, R/AT SANTHEKALLAHALLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK, CHIKKABALLALPUR DISTRICT. (OWNER OF TATA SUMO).

¶35

SRI. MOULAS S/O SRI. SYED NAZEER AHMED R/AT RAMA MANDIRA STREET, VIJAYAPURA, DEVANAHLLI TALUK, BAGNALORE RURAL DISTRICT. (INSURED OF TATA SUMO).

¶36

...RESPONDENTS

¶37

(BY SRI. B.C. THIPPESWAMY,ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 AND R3 - SERVED)

¶38

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.74/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, CHINTAMANI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,22,400/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38135 MFA No. 1630 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 1631 of 2019

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

DATE OF PETITION TILL THE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED.

¶42

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶43

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶44

MFA No.1630/2019 and MFA No.1631/2019 are filed by the appellant/insurance company under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 06.07.2018 passed in MVC Nos.73/2014 and 74/2014 respectively, by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., MACT, Chinthamani.

¶45

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-is absent.

¶46

The petitioner/injured claimant in both cases had filed petitions before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- and Rs.10,00,000/- respectively. The Trial Court, after considering the entire evidence on record,

¶47

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:38135 MFA No. 1630 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 1631 of 2019

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,100/and Rs.1,22,400/- respectively, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petitions till the date of deposit. The Tribunal further held that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and directed respondent No.3 – Insurance Company to deposit the amount within 30 days. Aggrieved by the said order, these appeals have been filed.

¶50

It is contended that, as per the policy, it is only a liability policy and no additional premium has been paid to cover the risk of the inmates of the car. Hence, the company is not liable to pay compensation. Before the Tribunal, the copy of the policy was not filed. However, learned counsel for respondent No.3 had submitted that the inmates of the offending vehicle were not covered under the policy. Since the policy copy was not produced, the liability was fastened on the insurance company.

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:38135 MFA No. 1630 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 1631 of 2019

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Subsequently, respondent No.3-insurance

¶54

company filed I.A.No.2/2019 in both the cases for production of additional documents. The said application is allowed and the insurance policy of the offending vehicle has been placed on record. On perusal, the policy clearly reveals that it is only a private car liability policy and no additional premium has been paid to cover the risk of inmates of the vehicle. Accordingly, the liability of the insurance company is absolved and the insurance company is exonerated from paying the liability. The claimants are at liberty to recover the compensation amount from owner of the vehicle.

¶55