NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SOPHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the second respondent in O.P.(MV) No.403 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor. The respondents are the claimants therein. They had in the claim petition prayed for award of the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation for the death of Sunil, husband of the first claimant, father of claimants 2 and 3 and son of the fourth claimant, in a motor accident that took place on 21.9.2010. They had in the claim petition stated that while late Sunil was riding his motor bike along the Aluva - Munnar road, a motor car, owned and driven by the first respondent came from the opposite direction, collided with the motor bike and in that accident the victim sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries sustained by him on the way to Taluk Headquarters Hospital, Aluva. They contended that the accident took place solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent, the owner-cum- driver of the motor car.

(2.) Upon receipt of notice, the first respondent entered appearance and filed a written statement denying the allegation that he was responsible for the accident. He contended that the amount claimed as compensation is exorbitant and excessive and that in the event of compensation being awarded, the insurer is liable to pay the same. The appellant in this appeal entered appearance and filed a written statement admitting the existence of a valid policy of insurance. It contended that the compensation claimed is exorbitant and excessive. It also raised a contention that the insurer was not negligent and that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the victim himself.

(3.) Before the tribunal, the claimants produced and marked Exts.A1 to A8. They also examined PW1, the Establishment Officer of Material Organisation, Kochi where the victim was employed, for the purpose of proving his avocation and income. On the side of the respondents, apart from producing Ext.B1, a copy of the policy of insurance, no other evidence was adduced. After considering the rival contentions and the materials on record, the tribunal held relying on the police records that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the owner-cum-driver of the motor car. The tribunal also held that Sunil, the predecessor-in-interest of the claimants died as a result of the injuries which he sustained in that accident. The tribunal thereafter proceeded to award the aggregate sum of Rs.32,56,472/- as compensation as detailed below: