The court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for fresh determination regarding the existence of a valid insurance policy and the correct quantum of compensation due to insufficient evidence.
Appeal allowed; matter remanded to the lower Tribunal for fresh determination of insurance validity and compensation quantum.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO M.A.C.M.A.NO.2758 OF 2011
JUDGMENT:-
The appeal is filed against the award in O.P.No.614 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum- I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad.
A claim for compensation of Rs.1 lakh was made for the injuries received by the petitioner in a motor accident. The lower Tribunal has accepted the nature of the incident on 10-12-1996, but, however, found that there is no proof of insurance and exonerated the liability of the Insurance Company which is the second respondent and granted a compensation of Rs.7000/-. Aggrieved by the said quantum of compensation and also the exonerating the liability of the Insurance Company, the present appeal is filed.
Now the point that arises for consideration is:-
1. Whether the amount of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and legal?
2. Whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay the said amount?
POINTS:-
So far as the liability of the Insurance Company is concerned, the appellant has not produced any policy or cover note and the particulars are also not said to have been given. According to the counsel for the appellant, the respondent has not adduced any evidence and there was no denial and, therefore, the Insurance Company cannot be exonerated. It is to be noted that in any claim under the Motor Vehicles Act, if an allegation as to a valid existing policy covering the risk has to be made and when prima facie material is adduced, the non-liability can only be established by the Insurance Company. Without giving any particulars of the policy or the cover note, the Insurance Company cannot be asked to say whether for a particular vehicle the policy subsists or not. So also regarding the quantum of compensation is concerned, the lower Tribunal has found that the Doctor who treated the claimant was not examined
and the evidence of PW.2 cannot be taken into consideration.
Therefore, it is quite clear that the necessary evidence to establish the claim has not been adduced and in view of the request made by learned counsel for the appellant an opportunity can be given to prove both the facts and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be allowed and the matter is remanded to the lower Tribunal for determination afresh whether there is a valid insurance to the vehicle or not and as to what is the quantum of compensation the petitioner will be entitled to. However, in case the Insurance Company is to be held liable, the interest shall be only from the date of passing of the award after the remand.
Accordingly the appeal is allowed. No costs.
___________________ N.R.L. NĀGESWARA RĀO,J
16-02-2012 TSNR
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the quantum of compensation granted by the lower Tribunal is just and legal?
Whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation?
Whether the appellant can prove a valid insurance policy for the vehicle?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PETITIONER/CLAIMANT
INSURANCE COMPANY
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE
N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
