The High Court rejected the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by National Insurance Company Limited. The bench dismissed the appeal confirming the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award without costs.
The appeal was dismissed and the lower court's decree was confirmed.
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.
]l
[33861
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLAN EOUS APPEAL NO: 959 OF 2023
Appeal filed Under Section'173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the Order and decree in MATOP No. 755 of 2017 daled. 29-12-2022 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- ll Additional District Judge, Khammam.
Between:
National lnsurance Company Limited, National Insurance Company Limited Represented by its Branch'Manager, Branch Office, D.No. 1i-B-i16141G4, MUR Enclave, Road No. 2, Narasimhapuri Colony, Opposite Astalaxmi Arch, Saroornagar, Hyderabad
...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.4
AND
... Respondents/Claim Petitioners
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.1 to 3
lA NO: 3 OF 2023
Petition under section I 5i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant interim stay of execution of the order and decree oatea 2s-,li-2022 made in MATOP No.75512017, on the file of MACT-cum-il Addr. District Judge at Khammam.
Counsel for the Appellant : SRl. T RAMULU
Counsel for the Respondents: GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
ltf
i,[x
THE HCiN'BLE SRI JUSTICEP.SAMKOSHY 'lt f AND il
THE HON'BI,E S{ JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANAALISHETTY M.A.C.M.A.No 959 ot2023 JUDGMENT: (tar iIoltIble Sri Ju:tice P.SAM KOSHY)
Heald ri T. Ramulu, learned Counsel appearing for
the appellant.
stating that pondent Nos.l, 3 and 4 are jointly and severally li II to pay the said amount to the claim Tribunal has also awarded an interest at the petitioners. +,[ rate of 7.5o/o annum from the date of filing of the claim ,I oetition till the . ilate F,L of realization. ir
i' 't 3. Thelobrusal of the record would show that the it
Tribunal in thei course of passing the impugned awardhas il 'i quantified cohtlibutory negligence at 50%o ratio upon the two
.r.a
2
vehiclesinvolved in the accidenti.e. the I,orry belonging to i1 thepresent appellant bearingRegistration No.TS.06-UB-5336 andthe DCM Van bearingNo.AP.05-W-4635.
4 The challengein the presentappeal is to the extent of contributorynegligence fasteneduponthe appellant-Insurance Companyand the Lorry whichthe appell ant has insured i.e. I I -1336 Learned LorrybearingRegistrationNo.TS.06- T I Counselfor the aPPellantsubmits idence which has I comebefore the Tribunal goes to J_:4the 1 Driver of the I I
Lorry,insured by the present appellant, pas taken all the
precautionswhile parkingthe vehicle on NH-65,in addition, il the vehicle vehiclealso had a radium sticker at the real side which had a radium sticker at the real side which a radium sticker at the real side which radium sticker at the real side which at the real side which the real side which real side which side which whichtoo lr
the vehicle vehiclealso had a radium sticker at the real side which had a radium sticker at the real side which a radium sticker at the real side which radium sticker at the real side which at the real side which the real side which real side which side which whichtoo
has beenaccepted by the Driver of the DC$41Vanwhich had ti hit the Lorryfrom the rear side- Thereforlthe extentof ilr contributorynegligenceassessedby the T I is incorrect and accordinglythe award is elroneous. p" 5 We have consideredthe evidence \lihiph has come on ll record and the pleadings, whereby, it woul evidently clear Ti
tri
3
that the place 0f accident was NH-65 and the time of accident was at 4:30 A.M. The accident occurred on account of the Lorry insured by the appellant which was parked on the NH_ 65. It goes without saying that 4:30 A.M. is normally pretty dark and the lorry seems to be have got parked on the National Highway itself. No specific rqlsons or materiar are made available and the records to justify the parking of the Lorry on the National Highway. Highways are normally not meant for parking of the vehicles and that too at odd hours and in the Highways normally, it is the tendency of the persons travelling to move pretty fast and at that moment of time, if therer are unmanned stationed vehicles parked on the National Highway, there is always an element of risk of there being an accident which unforhrnatery in the instant case has occurred and the deceased died of the injuries sustained from the said accident. The Tribunal after due perusal of the records has reached to the conclusion that there is an element of contributory negligence on the Driver of both the vehicles involved in the accident. The Insurance Company of the
4
I
opposite vehicle i.e. DCM Van has been exonerated bythe ll Tribunal fastening the liability upon the 1w4rerof the said vehicle and upon the present appellant. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, there is no challenge bythe owner of the DCM Van so far as the liabiliryfastened upon them and there is also no appeal filed by the claimants questioning the exoneration of respondent No.2 Insurance Company as far as the liability of 5I9%contributory I I, negligence fastened upon the present appeal sponcerned. 6. In the given factual backdrop, more particularly, the place of accident and the time of accident rand the Lorry which was insured by the appellant being parked on the Highway and which was in statignery position, 50%o of contributory negligence fastened by the Tfbunal cannot be said to be unreasonable or bad in law. Thelefore, we do not find any strong case made out by the annelfalt calling for an interference with the impugned award. The appeal of the appellant-insurance Company thus fails and is accordingly rejected. Nonetheless, it is required to clarifu at this juncture
5
that the appellant, who is the Insurance Company of the
Lorry, would be held liable to indemnify the owner of the
Lorry to the extent of 50oh of the compensation awarded in
terms of the contributory negligence affixed by the Tribunal.
No order as to costs.
this appeal, shall stand closed.
SD/. MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI, ASSISTANT R GISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
ADK $-
HIGH COURT
DATED:05l0gl2023
JUDGMENT
1 r^e STAr€ o
(
c
a
I B ttB zsll
t
cssPr,,1c
MACMA.No.9S9 of 2023
REJECTING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS
{tg 2D
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO
TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OFSEPTEMEER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTHREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANAALISHETTY
MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEALNO:959OF 2023
Between:
National lnsurance Company Limited, Nationallnsurance Company Limited Reoresented bv its Branch-Manaqer. Branch Office, D.No.11-8-1'l6l4lc4. MUR Enclave, iload No. 2, Narasihhapuri Colony,Opposite AstalaxmiArch. Saroornagar, Hyderabad
...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.4
AND
...Respondents/Claim Petitioners
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.i to 3
Appeal filed Under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree in MATOP No. 755 of 201r dated. 29-i2-2022 on the file of the court of the Motor Accident claims Tribunar-cum- ll Additionar District Judge, Khammam.
ORDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of SRl. T RAMULU, Advocate for the Appellant and of sRl. GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTH|, Advocate for the Respondents.
This Court doth Order and Decree as follows :
SD/- MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTTO OFFICER
To,
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum_ ll Additional District Judge, Khammam. (With records, if any) 2 Two CD Copies
ADK <sup>_w-
HIGH COURT DATED:0510912023
2 DRAFTS
DECREE
MACMA.No.9S9 of 2023
REJECTING THE MACMA WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Insurance Company against the Tribunal's award on contributory negligence should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
National Insurance Company Limited
Kudupuganti Rama
P. Sam Koshy
Laxmi Narayana Alishetty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
