HDFC GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW KNOWN AS HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS ASST MANAGER (L), BENGALURU Vs. M. KUMARASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the insurer challenging the Judgment and Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, XX Additional Judge and XVIII ACMM, Bengaluru in MVC No.4407/2008 granting compensation of Rs.50,000/- under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short).

(2.) The claim petition would disclose that on 17.02.2008, the son of the claimants was proceeding from Bengaluru to Mysuru in a car bearing registration No.KA-02-MG-800. At about 1.30 am., the driver of the car drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a road median. As a result, the car turned turtle and the son of the claimant sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the way to the hospital. It was claimed that the deceased was working as a Customer Support Executive in CL1 3L e-Services Ltd., and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.11,412/- per month. The claimants therefore, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act, claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-.

(3.) The insurer filed its written statement and admitted that the car in question was covered by a policy of insurance issued by it. It however, contended that the claimant had colluded with the police who had filed a charge sheet against Mr.Kiran Kumar, who was allegedly driving the car at the time of accident. The insurer contended that it was the deceased who was driving the car and not Mr.Kiran Kumar and therefore, the claimants had implicated one Mr.Kiran Kumar against whom the charge sheet was filed by the jurisdictional police.