MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act', for short) is filed by the insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 18.10.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - VII , Vijaypura, (henceforth referred to as 'Tribunal', for short) in M.V.C. No. 701/2013.

(2.) The claim petition filed before the Tribunal discloses that the claimants are the legal representatives of Smt. Laxmibai. It is stated that on 29.03.2011 Smt.Laxmibai was sitting near the front gate of Rural Civil Hospital, Akkalkot. At about 4.30 p.m., the driver of an Indica car bearing Reg. No.MH-13/AC-2456 (henceforth referred as 'offending vehicle') reversed it and dashed against Smt. Laxmibai. As a result, she suffered grievous injuries and was shifted to Solapur hospital, where she died. The claimants claimed that the deceased was vending milk and was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. and was contributing the same to the family. They alleged negligence by the driver of the car which was duly insured and thus filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation of a sum of Rs.30,75,000/-.

(3.) The owner of the car was placed ex parte before the Tribunal. The insurer contested the claim petition and denied the involvement of the car bearing Reg. No.MH-13/AC-2456. It was claimed that the claimants were residents of Solapur district and the owner of the vehicle was also a resident of Solapur district and therefore, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction. They contended that when a complaint was lodged with the jurisdictional police, the vehicle number was provided as MH-13/2450 which incidentally was the registration number of a motor cycle. They alleged that after the claimants realised the mistake they implicated the vehicle in question. They also claimed that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess licence to drive the offending vehicle. The claimant No.2 was examined as P.W.1 and two other eye-witnesses were examined as P.W.2 and 3 and they marked Exs.P-1 to P-9. The insurer examined its official as R.W.1 and marked Exs.R-1 to R-5.