Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 604 (ALL)

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. NARESH KUMAR

2003-03-24

M.P.SINGH, S.P.SRIVASTAVA

body2003
S. P. SRIVASTAVA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Mr. Satish chaturvedi, learned counsel for the insurer appellant and Mr. J. J. Munir, the learned counsel for the claimant caveators. ( 2 ) THE appellant feels aggrieved by the award of the Motor Accidents Claims tribunal, determining a total amount of rs. 2,42,726 (rupees two lakh forty-two thousand seven hundred and twenty-six only) as just compensation, to which the claimant Naresh Kumar was found entitled to on account of the grievous injury resulting in permanent disability caused in an accident involving the offending motor vehicle, jeep insured by appellant covering the risk. ( 3 ) THE Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on a careful consideration of the evidence and materials brought on record, has come to the conclusion that the injured had a monthly income of Rs. 1,500. The Tribunal utilising the multiplier of 12 had calculated the amount of compensation. The discretion exercised by the Tribunal holding the disability to be only 73. 5 per cent, taking into consideration the nature of the injuries and their effect and impact on the body of the injured workman, cannot be held to be arbitrary. ( 4 ) THE injured-claimant had asserted that he was getting an income of Rs. 5,000 per month. Before the Tribunal a salary certificate has been produced which indicated that he was being paid the salary of rs. 3,000 per month. The injured had set up a claim that apart from Rs. 3,000 per month, he was getting income from agricultural holdings. The Tribunal, however, had calculated the amount of compensation taking his salary to be only Rs. 1,500 per month and utilising the multiplier of 12. The age of the injured at the time of accident was found to be 32 years. ( 5 ) IT may also be noticed that the claim of the insured as well as the owner to the effect that the injured was travelling in the jeep as a passenger after paying fare had been disbelieved. It was also found that the injured was travelling in the jeep without paying any fare being an acquaintance of the driver. It was also found that the motor vehicle in question was not being run for any purpose other than that for which it has been registered. It was also found that the injured was travelling in the jeep without paying any fare being an acquaintance of the driver. It was also found that the motor vehicle in question was not being run for any purpose other than that for which it has been registered. It has also been found that none of the terms and conditions subject to which the insurance policy had been issued, has been violated. The plea of the insurer to the effect that the driver Amit Kumar had no valid licence to drive the motor vehicle in question was not accepted observing that no evidence had been led in support of such plea. ( 6 ) IT may be noticed that it is not disputed by the insurer appellant that it had not been granted permission envisaged under section 170 of the Motor Vehicles act. Obviously, in the facts and circumstances of the present case the ratio of the decision rendered in the case of National insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nicolletta Rohtagi, 2002 ACJ 1950 (SC), stands squarely attracted and the insurer appellant cannot be deemed to be entitled to challenge the quantum of compensation determined by the Tribunal as just compensation. ( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has tried to assail the findings returned against it by the Motor Accidents Claims tribunal. The aforesaid findings, however, could not be demonstrated to be suffering from any such legal infirmity which may justify an interference therein by this court. The findings returned against the appellant by the Tribunal are amply supported and warranted by the evidence and material brought on record. ( 8 ) TAKING into consideration the facts and circumstances, as brought on record, no justifiable ground has been made out for any interference in the evaluation of the evidence as done by the Tribunal. Moreover, the findings returned by the Tribunal about the age of the third party victim and the use of multiplier as well as the income of the deceased are amply supported and warranted by the evidence and materials brought on record. The amount of compensation, taking into consideration the number of the dependants, does not appear to be unjust. ( 9 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant has further urged that there was a breach of terms and. conditions, subject to which the insurance policy was issued covering the risk. The amount of compensation, taking into consideration the number of the dependants, does not appear to be unjust. ( 9 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant has further urged that there was a breach of terms and. conditions, subject to which the insurance policy was issued covering the risk. The contention is that at the time of the accident the driver of the offending motor vehicle was not having valid licence to run the vehicle. ( 10 ) BE what it may, so far as the statutory liability of the insurer appellant as contemplated under the provisions of the motor Vehicles Act in the matter relating to the payment of just compensation determined by the Motor Accidents Claims tribunal is concerned, the mere fact that there was violation of the terms and conditions subject to which the insurance policy had been issued, cannot have the effect of exonerating the insurer from the statutory liability cast upon him in this regard to pay the amount to the third party victim. ( 11 ) THE position in law in this regard has been amply clarified by this court vide the request rendered by a Division Bench in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Asha Devi, 2004 ACJ 418 (Allahabad ). ( 12 ) IN such a situation, it is always open to the insurer appellant to get the amount, paid in excess, refunded to it from the owner-insured in an appropriate proceedings initiated before the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal in which proceedings such a dispute can be decided between the insurer and the insured after affording an opportunity of hearing to the insured in accordance with law. ( 13 ) IT will, therefore, be open to the insurer appellant to initiate an appropriate proceeding for the refund of the amount paid by it to the claimants on establishing the breach of the terms and conditions subject to which the insurance policy had been issued. ( 14 ) THE dismissal of this appeal will not come in the way of the insurer appellant in initiating such proceedings. ( 15 ) TAKING into consideration the facts and circumstances, as brought on record, no justifiable ground has been made out for any interference in the impugned award. ( 16 ) TAKING into consideration the totality of the circumstances as brought on record, the quantum of compensation cannot be held to be unjust. ( 15 ) TAKING into consideration the facts and circumstances, as brought on record, no justifiable ground has been made out for any interference in the impugned award. ( 16 ) TAKING into consideration the totality of the circumstances as brought on record, the quantum of compensation cannot be held to be unjust. ( 17 ) THIS appeal is totally devoid of merits, which deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. ( 18 ) AS prayed, amount of Rs. 25,000 deposited in this court by the insurer appellant under section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act be remitted back to the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal concerned so that it may be disbursed to the claimant. Appeal dismissed.