UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. BY REGIONAL MANAGER Vs. SMT. PARVATHI BAI W/O LATE RAMAGIRI NAIK AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS 1 to 5 had filed MVC 460/2005 against the appellant/6th respondent and one J.K. Ramegowda under Section 166 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, he said petition was allowed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -IV at Chickkamagalur, awarding compensation of Rs. 3,13,000/ - with interest at 6% p.a. and directing the appellant to satisfy the award. Feeling aggrieved, this appeal has been preferred.

(2.) ONE Ramagiri Naik, son of Narayana Naik, resident of T.B. Kaval, Nidagatta post, Kadur taluk in Chikmagalur District, &n agriculturist and shandy businessman, while travelling in the goods van bearing Registration No. KA -18/4337 along with his goods, met with a fatal accident and succumbed to the injuries. The 1st respondent is his wife and respondents 2 to 5 are his children. They filed claim petition under Section 166 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, the death of the said Ramagiri Naik was due to actionable negligence of the driver of the said vehicle who was impleaded as respondent No. 3 in the claim petition. The claim petition was contested by the respondents therein. The appellant -Insurer contended that the vehicle being a goods vehicle and the deceased being a gratuitous passenger, it has no legal liability to satisfy the award, if any, passed. Based on the pleadings of the parties, issues were raised by the Tribunal. First claimant deposed as PW1. Another witness was examined to establish actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the said vehicle. Ex. P1 to P8 were marked in their evidence. On behalf of the respondents, an authorized representative of the insurance Company deposed as RW1. The driver of the said vehicle deposed as RW2. Ex. R1 to R3 were marked in their evidence. After considering the oral and documentary evidence on record with reference to the rival contentions of the parties, the tribunal has held that, the driver having driven the vehicle in rash and negligent manner, Ramagiri Nayak sustained fatal accident and died later. It has further held that, the claimant being the wife and children of the deceased, have suffered the loss.

(3.) SRI . O. Mahesh, contended that, the tribunal has grossly erred in fastening the liability on the appellant/insurer in respect of the occupant carried in the insured goods vehicle where such risk was not covered as per policy -Ex. R1. According to the learned Counsel, the judgment and award of the tribunal is contrary to law and material on record an that, the fastening of the liability insofar as the appellant is concerned is liable to be set aside. Learned Counsel placed reliance on the decision of this Court In the case of United India Insurance Co. Limited v. Krishnappa and Anr. reported in 2007 (4) KCCR 2713.