DIVISIONAL MANAGER Vs. M GANGADHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals by the Insurer are directed against the common judgment and award dated 17th April 2007 passed in MVC Nos.2357/2006 & 2354/2006 by the XIX Additional SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-17), (for short, 'Tribunal' ). The Insurer has filed these two appeals, seeking to set aside the liability fastened on it, on the ground that the Insurer is not liable to indemnify the award.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that, the claimants in both these appeals had filed individual claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 4:00 P.M, on 10-06-2005, the deceased in the said cases namely Jagappa and Nagesh respectively met with the road traffic accident, when they were going in an Autorickshaw bearing No.AEM-BLH-74712. When they were returning back at about 8:45 P.M, the driver of the said Autorickshaw drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and applied sudden brake, due to which, the autorickshaw fell turtled. Due to the impact, deceased Jagappa and Nagesh sustained grievous injuries and died.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for claimants, at the outset submits that the relief sought for by the appellant/Insurer in these two appeals cannot be sustained and is liable to be rejected on the sole ground that the Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability on the Insurer to satisfy the award passed in the instant case, as the same has also been confirmed by this Court in M.F.A.No.13806/2007 filed by Sri. Subbaiah and others disposed of on 24th January 2011 and in M.F.A.No.13805/2007 filed by Sri.Gangadhar and others, disposed of on 25th January 2011, against whom the present appeals are filed by the Insurer. While confirming the liability saddled on the Insurer, this Court has also enhanced the compensation. Therefore, he submits that these two appeals filed by the Insurer are liable to be dismissed as being devoid of merit.