BRANCH MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. BRANCH OFFICE, YASHORAM CHAMBERS, R.G. ROAD, CHIKMAGALUR NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE, 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 Vs. T.C. MALLIKARJUNA S/O.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OFFICE objection is dispensed with. These two appeals are filed by the insurer against the judgment and awards dated 11 -4 -2012 passed by the Principal District Judge and MACT, Chickmagalur, in MVC Nos. 260 and 261/2009.

(2.) THE insurance company has challenged the liability fastened on it on the ground that there is no coverage to the policy and hence the liability saddled is erroneous and against the conditions of the policy.

(3.) THE Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.64,000/ - and Rs.69,000/ - respectively for the injuries sustained by the claimants in a motor accident. The liability is saddled on the insurance company. In paragraph 30 of the judgment, the Tribunal has held thus: - Ex.R6 Notarised copy of the RC of the offending vehicle discloses the seating capacity as 2+1=3 totally. Even Ex.R9 the RC particulars produced by RW -1 discloses the same seating capacity. It is common sense that the first person will be the Driver. However, there is no specification as to who all should be those two other passengers. Even from the petitioners herein were not fare paid passengers and they are coolies working in the coffee estate of the 2nd respondent and admittedly, since it was a holiday for them, they had been for shopping in Chikmagalur and apparently with the permission instructions of the owner. Ex.R -8 is a package B policy as admitted by respondent No.3 himself. It specifies the seating capacity as '0" but it apparently depicts the non -application of mind by the issuing authority of the insurance policy. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the 3rd respondent can be made liable to answer two claims and the liability of the third one will have to be saddled on the owner of the vehicle.... In view of the clear reasoning assigned by the Tribunal for fastening the liability on the appellant insurance company, there is no scope for interference. The appeals are dismissed. The amounts in deposit shall be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursement.