Partly allowed

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.Adilabad v. Syed Atir Salman and 3 Ors.

Telangana HC9 Feb 2012CMA/1703/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil appeal, the Insurance Company challenged the Claims Tribunal award regarding an accident where the jeep driver was found solely responsible. The High Court upheld the liability finding and compensation amount, reducing the interest rate from 9% to 7% per annum.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is partly allowed; interest rate reduced from 9% to 7% per annum.

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.Adilabad Vs Syed Atir… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY THE NINETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶5

CMA.NO. 1703 OF 2003

¶6

Between: The New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Nirmal Branch, Adilabad district Represented by its Branch Manager … Appellant V/s. Syed Atir Salman & 3-Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Appellant : Sri Mandada Srinivasa Rao Counsel for the Respondents : Sri G.Madhusudhan Reddy

¶7

The Court made the following : (Judgment follows next page)

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶9

CMA.NO. 1703 OF 2003

¶10

JUDGMENT :

¶11

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited, third respondent in the claim-petition before the learned Claims Tribunal, challenging the award dated 22-072002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, in OP.No. 780 of 1998.

¶12

2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondentclaimant.

¶13

3. The accident took place on 29-06-1997 at about 02:50 p.m., at the outskirts of Perkit village in Nizamabad district. The claimant along with others was travelling in a jeep bearing No. AP-1C-1742 from Nirmal towards Nizamabad when the jeep reached near Perkit village on NH-No.7 at about 02:50 p.m., an APSRTC bus bearing No.AP-10-Z-179 of Manchrial depot came in the opposite direction and dashed against the jeep, wherein the injured and other persons received severe injuries. The APSRTC as well as the owner of the jeep and the Insurance Company were partyrespondents before the Claims Tribunal.

¶14

4. The question arose before the Claims Tribunal for consideration

¶15

was as to whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep or whether it was on account of negligence on the part of the jeep driver as well as the driver of the APSRTC bus. The Claims Tribunal upon considering the evidence of PW-2 eye-witness and the other documents taking into account the material available on record arrived at the conclusion that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep driver. The said finding is challenged in the present appeal besides challenging the quantum of compensation.

¶16

5. MACMA.No.1702 of 2003 arose out of the same accident came up before the learned single Judge of this Court, which was heard and disposed of by the learned single Judge by judgment dated 04-03-2011. The learned single Judge of this Court on hearing either side and considering the evidence available on record concurred with the findings of the Claims Tribunal and held that the jeep driver alone was responsible for the accident. As regards the quantum of compensation, expressed the view that the assessment of compensation made by the Claims Tribunal was just and reasonable. In the instant case also having gone through the award passed by the learned Claims Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation granted by the learned Claims Tribunal is just and reasonable and it needs no interference. The learned single Judge in the above case reduced the rate of interest from 9% to 7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Since the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge was in respect of the claim arising out of the same

¶17

accident. In this civil miscellaneous appeal also I hold that the accident was solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of jeep bearing No.AP-1-C-1742 and the quantum of compensation needs no interference. However, as held by the learned single Judge, the rate of interest in this appeal is reduced from 9% to 7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶18

6. With the reduction in the rate of interest as indicated above, the

¶19

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is partly allowed without any order as to costs.

¶20

________________________ JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO.

¶21

09-02-2012 I s L

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶23

CMA.NO. 1703 OF 2003

¶24

Circulation No. Date: 09-02-2012 Court Master: I s L Computer No.43

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.Adilabad v. Syed Atir Salman and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.Adilabad v. Syed Atir Salman and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Subba Reddy Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Pedapudi Satyavathi, Vs Donipati Rama Chandrarao

Gaddam Vishwanadham Vs Mukhim Ahmed

Chukka Sanyasamma Vs Banti Venugopala Reddy

Maragani Ramaiah Vs Gandam Pulla Rao

Shaik Mohammad Gouse Vs G. Venkata Subbaiah