Skip to content


United India Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manager, Nagercoil Vs. Vijayalakshmi and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberC.M.A(MD)No. 1225 of 2012 & M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2012
Judge
AppellantUnited India Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Branch Manager, Nagercoil
RespondentVijayalakshmi and Others
Excerpt:
.....is decided against the owner and in favour of the insurer. before release of the amount to the insured, owner of the vehicle shall be issued a notice and he shall be required to furnish security for the entire amount, which the insurer will pay to the claimants. the offending vehicle shall be attached, as a part of the security. if necessity arises the executing court shall, take assistance of the concerned regional transport authority. the executing court shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as to the manner in which the insured, owner of the vehicle shall make payment to the insurer. in case there is any default it shall be open to the executing court to direct realization by disposal of the securities to be furnished or from any other property or properties of the.....
Judgment:

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 01.10.2010 made in M.C.O.P.No.1038 of 2009, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Tirunelveli.)

1. The appellant/Insurance Company Limited has filed the present C.M.A(MD)No.1225 of 2012, challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.1038 of 2009, dated 01.10.2010, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Tirunelveli.

2. The accident took place on 18.06.2009, it is a case of fatal and the deceased was died instantly on the spot and the heirs of the deceased filed the claim petition, seeking compensation before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Fast Track Court No.2, Tirunelveli. By considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded Rs.5,35,000/- towards total compensation.

3. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company is that the driver, who was driving the vehicle was not in possession of the valid driving licence and therefore, the appellant/Insurance company is to be exonerated from liability. It is a finding of the Tribunal, that the driver was not holding the valid licence while driving the vehicle, which caused the accident and therefore as per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanjappan and others reported in(2004) 13 SCC 224 is applied which is extracted below:

8.Therefore, while setting aside the judgment of the High Court we direct in terms of what has been stated in Baljit Kaur's case (supra) that the insurer shall pay the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal, about which there was no dispute raised, to the respondent-claimants within three months from today. For the purpose of recovering the same from the insured, the insurer shall not be required to file a suit. It may initiate a proceeding before the concerned Executing Court as if the dispute between the insurer and the owner was the subject matter of determination before the Tribunal and the issue is decided against the owner and in favour of the insurer. Before release of the amount to the insured, owner of the vehicle shall be issued a notice and he shall be required to furnish security for the entire amount, which the insurer will pay to the claimants. The offending vehicle shall be attached, as a part of the security. If necessity arises the Executing court shall, take assistance of the concerned Regional Transport authority. The Executing Court shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as to the manner in which the insured, owner of the vehicle shall make payment to the insurer. In case there is any default it shall be open to the Executing court to direct realization by disposal of the securities to be furnished or from any other property or properties of the owner of the vehicle, the insured. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs.

4. The appellant/Insurance Company cannot be exonerated for the liability and the principle was already considered by the Tribunal and an order of pay and recovery was passed.

5. Such being the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal, the same is confirmed and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.

6. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents 1 to 7/claimants are permitted to withdraw their share by making necessary applications before the Tribunal as per the ratio fixed by the Tribunal. In so far as the minor share is concerned, the Tribunal is directed to deposit the said amount in any one of the Nationalised Bank, till he attains majority. The guardian of the minor is permitted to withdraw the interest of the minor share once in three months directly from the bank. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //