NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. , arises from the award dated 10. 10. 1991, given in M. V. C. No. 77 of 1988, which had been decided along with M. V. C. Nos. 76, 78, 79 and 80 of 1988, arising out of claim in petitions filed by different persons as a result of injuries suffered in one and common accident. The present appeal is confined to the award given with reference to M. V. C. No. 77 of 1988.

(2.) THE facts of the case in the nutshell are that on 2. 2. 1988, lorry bearing the registration No. TMC 7459, which was driven by one Shankar, from Madras to Bangalore and when the aforesaid lorry was near Hosakote gate, on Bangalore-Kolar road at 6. 35 a. m. as it was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, in the process of avoiding a bullock cart, suddenly turned on the left side of the road and dashed against a tree. According to the case of the claimants in m. V. C. No. 77 of 1988, one Sampath who was aged 23 years and who was son of claimant Nos. 1 and 2 and husband of claimant No. 3 and who was working with Ramachandran as a coolie getting daily wages of Rs. 50/-, was going along with the load of powdered husk to be supplied at Tumkur. The claimants case is that Sampath was going along with the load of powdered husk under the directions of his employer who was the owner of the rice mill and so he was travelling in the lorry as he had to get the powdered husk supplied and receive the money. In that capacity, according to the claimants case, Sampath was travelling in the lorry as an agent and employee of the rice mill owner with the load of powdered husk. Petitioners case is that when the lorry suddenly turned to the left side of the road and dashed against the tree, Sampath was injured and he died on the spot. The claimants have further stated in the claim petition that the claimants were depending on deceased Sampath who was regularly maintaining the family consisting of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, that is, the parents, his own wife claimant petitioner No. 3 and also his baby daughter aged about 6 months at the time of the accident. The claimants asserted that he was the sole bread earner in the family and on account of his death the family has suffered badly. The third claimant, that is, the wife also made a claim for loss of company and consortium of her husband. The claimants asserted that the income of the deceased was Rs. 50/- per day. The claimants, that is, petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in the M. V. C. No. 77 of 1988 (respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the appeal) had made their claim for a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation of the amount.

(3.) THE claim of the claimants was contested by respondent No. 2 in the claim petition, namely, the insurance company. Respondent No. 1 remained ex parte in all the cases, while insurance company contested the claim in all the cases. The respondent No. 2 denied the allegations contained in the claim petitions as well as denied the allegations to the effect that deceased sampath was working as an employee with the rice mill concerned belonging to Ramachandran. The respondent No. 2 further alleged that deceased Sampath and other claimants in other claim petitions were travelling in the lorry as unauthorised passengers and as such insurance company was not liable to pay any compensation. It further alleged that the compensation claimed by the claimants has been exorbitant, unreasonable and imaginary. The insurance company admitted that the respondent No. 1, the owner of the lorry, had a valid insurance of the vehicle on the date of accident and the liability if any of the compensation is subject to terms and conditions of the policy and the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and prayed that the claim petition be dismissed.