Dismissed

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd., Hyd v. Smt. Azizunnisa, Medak Dist and 4 Othrs

Telangana HC9 Nov 2023MACMA/895/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the insurance company against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's order awarding approximately Rs.22.66 lakh in compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased. The court confirmed the lower court's finding of joint and several liability and upheld the interest rate.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed; the order of the Trial Court in O.P.No.240 of 2012 is confirmed; no order as to costs.

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd., Hyd Vs Smt. Azizunnisa, Medak… — Insurance | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IhI THE HIGH COUR] FOR THE STA,TE OF IELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY THE NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶5

h/OTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 895 OF 2013

¶6

Appeal under/Sec.173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and Decree made in O.P.No.240 of 2012 dated 20.12.2012 on the file of the Chairman, MVACTCum-Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

¶7

Between

¶8

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COM. LTD., HYD, Rep. by its Arlanager Regional Office Snehalatha Buildings Begumpet Hyderabad

¶9

Ap pella nt/Responde nt No.2

¶10

Ai'ID

¶11

Smt Azizunnisa, Wo. Late Fakruddin Occ House hold R/o. H.No. 5-4-106 Itlagdum Nagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Medak District

¶12

2 Kur:r Mchsin Faihima, D/o. Late Fakruddin Ccc Student R/c, H.No. 5-4-106 Magcium Nagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Meclak District

¶13

Tasmiya Nazeem, Dio. Late Fakruddin Occ Student R/o. H.No. 54-106 Magdum Nagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Medak District

¶14

4 Faisal Ahmed. S/o. Late Fakruddin Occ Student R/o. Fl.No. 5-4-106 [\4agdum Nager Sengareddy Town and Mandal, IVledak District ( Respondent / petitioner No,4 being minor rep. by his mother and natural guardian i.e., respondent / petitioner No.1 )

¶15

Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners 1 to 4

¶16

5 fi,4ohi Htrdr-rl Razaq, S/o. il/lohd. Abdul Samad Occ []usiness R/o. H.No. 2-4106 Choubar Bidar District Karnataka State.

¶17

. Respondent No.S/Respondent No.1

¶18

lA. NO 1 0F 2013(MACMAMP. NO.2005 0F 2013

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the afficlar,'i'. iiled ;n supiiort of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to stay

¶20

the operation of the Jurlgment and decree daled 20.12.2O12 made in OP No. 240 of 2012 on the file of tlre Hon'ble Chairman, MACT-cum- Principal District Judge, Medak at S:ngarecid.T.

¶21

Counsel for the Appellarrt .SRl A RAMAKRISHNA REDDY 9s\ Counsel for the Responrlents Nos I to 4. S ASHOK ANAND KUMAR

¶22

The Courl made tie following: JUDGTUENT

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶24

M.A.C.M.A.No.895 of 2O13

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed against the Order dated 20.12.2012 in O.P.No.240 of 2012 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

¶27

The appellants/petitioners filed O.P.No.24O of 2012, ciaiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for the death of the deceased, Fakruddin, in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 23.07.2O1O. Respondent No. 1 remained exparte. Respondent No.2 in his counter disputed the accident and also stated that driver is not holding valid license and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

The Trial Court considering the oral and documentary evidence came to the conclusion that owner and insurer of the vehicle are jointly and severally liable and awarded Rs.22,66,000/- with interest @Boh per annum from the date of the petition to till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company preferred the present appeal.

¶29

¶30

Learned counsel for appellant mainly conterrded that the interest the',2 zrc entitled for is 6% but not B% and also stated that the'lrial Court did not considered the negligence on the part of the deceased.

¶31

Considering the arguments on both sides and on perusal of the record, this Court hnds it reasonable not to interfere with tl-rt: crder passed by the Trial Court.

¶32

In the resuh., the appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the Trial Court in O.P.No.240 ol 2Ol2 passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

//TRUE COPY//

SD/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISI'ANT REGISTRAR

¶38

/y^--

¶39

SECTION OFFICER

¶40

'I o, 1. The Cfrarrrnarr IV1VACT-Cum-principal District Judge, Medak at -^{Sangareddy.(with recordsif any)} 2. One CC to SRt A RAMAKR|SIjNA REDDY Advocate tOpUCl 3 One CC to SRI.S ASHOK ANAND KUMAR Advocate fOpU-Ci' 4. Two CD Copies g

DATED: o*it^1/:1023

JUDGMENT

MACMA.No.895 of²⁰¹³

e TA
q
I. 2
O
oI
\ t.i<br>-i,
cF

¶45

M"A.C.M.A. IS DISMISIiED

¶46

G)c'nio
S."
>k

¶47

,i'l illE lllra,Ff COURI FOR THE STA.TE OF ;ELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶48

THURSDAY THE NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TVIiO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶49

PRESENT

¶50

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶51

I'IOTC AaCIDEN]- CIVIL \IISCELLANEOUS APPE/\L NO: 895 OF 2013

¶52

Between

¶53

l-.it,^,IR|E-NTAL iNSURAI',ICE COM. LTD., llYD, Rep by its Manager Re,,giotial Office Snehalatha Buildings Begurnpet Hyderabad

¶54

Appellant/Respondent No.2

¶55

AND

¶56

I S;^{:i;:i:r-,:r11i53/e"16.} Late I;akruddin Occ House hold R/o.^{H.No. 5-4-106} fu'lagc'.lnr l.lagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Medak District

¶57

Kum. Mohsin Fathima, D/o. Late Fakruddin Occ Student R/o. H.No. 5-4-106 Magdum Nagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Medak District

¶58

3.^{T:,r' i ':i liazeei'r-r. D/o. l-ate Fakruddin Occ Student R/o. H.No. 5-4-106} fuIir3c,-l':r i{agar S;arrgareddy^-i-own and Mandal, Medak Diskict

¶59

+^{FaisalAhmed, S/o. Late Fakruddin Occ Student R/o. H.No. 5-4-106 Magdum} Nagar Sangareddy Town and Mandal, Medak District ( Respondent / petitioner No.4 being minor rep. by his mother and natural guardian i.e., re,.:poircje;rt .r petitioner No.1 )

¶60

. . Respondents I to 4/Petitioners 1 to 4

¶61

$.^{Mohd Abdul Razaq,S/o. Mohd. Abdul SamadOcc Business R/o. H.No. 2-4-} 105 Choubar Bidar District Karnataka State.

¶62

... Respondent No.S/Respondent No. 1

¶63

Appeal under/Sec.173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and Decree made in O P.No.240 of 2012 dated 20.12.2012 on the file of the Chairman, MVACTCum-Principai District Judge. Medak at Sangareddy.

¶64

ORDiR. ilris appeal corr:ing on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the MVOP and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A.Rama Krishna Reddy, Advocate for the appellant and of Sri S.Ashok Anand Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 lo4

¶65

This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶66

1 Tr 9t ihei i\4etc, A.i:cident Civil ll isct;ilanr:orls ,Allpr::al Lre and hereby is disn:issed;

¶67

Thal the order of the Trial Court in O.P.No.240 of 2012 passed by the Chairman, lt/lotor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Cum-Principal District Judge, Nnedak at Sangan:ddy is confirmed

¶68

3 T-ai iirp,r= sltall L.: rro arcer as io costs in this aopenl.

¶69

SD/- K. VENKAIAH ASSIST.ANT REGISTRAR

¶70

//TRUE COPYII

¶71

S[:CTION OFFICER

¶72

To, 1. The Chairman, MVACT-Cum-Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. (urith records if any)

¶73

2^-,';'to CD Copres

HIG}I COURT

iiAiSD: *i,i11/2073

iif;,:i:?E;i MACMA.t+c.89$ ef 2f'13

¶78

ii,i.A.c. rdl".&. I5 DISI'"il l5 S; E ll @.ia Qe --ft't^

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd., Hyd v. Smt. Azizunnisa, Medak Dist and 4 Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance Com. Ltd., Hyd v. Smt. Azizunnisa, Medak Dist and 4 Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Insurance Company Limited, Secunderabad. Vs Adulla Bhaskar Reddy and Another

The Ap State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs Smt.Mothiya Bai , Motya

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Suryapet Vs Vundra Madhava Reddy and Another

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Uppari Sandala Vanaja , Uppari Sandala Suneetha and 6 Ors.

Sant Singh Basanth Kaur Sahney Charitable Trust, Vs Dr. A.S. Gajendra Mudaliar

Srigadi Shankaraiah Vs a. Ramalinga Swamy and Anr.