LAWS(KER)-1996-11-6

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SANTHAMMA

Decided On November 29, 1996
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Appellant
V/S
SANTHAMMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The fourth respondent New India Assurance Company in M. V. O. P. No. 2347/85 is the appellant. The claim petition was filed by the legal heirs of one Appukkuttan Nair who died in a motor accident which took place at 9.45 P.M. on 25.9.1979. Appukuttan Nair was an employee of United Electrical Industries and on the date of the incident he was travelling in a bus No. KLQ 3095. When the bus reached near Madan Nada, Appukuttan Nair wanted to alight from the bus. The bus was stopped and he got down from the bus and white so the conductor gave the double bell and the bus suddenly moved forward. Appukuttan Nair who was lying on the road was run over by the rear wheel of the bus. He was immediately removed to the District Hospital, Quilon where he was treated there till he succumbed to injuries on 14.12.79. Petitioners in the MVOP claimed Rs. 1,13,019.46 as compensation. The Tribunal passed an award for 83,500/- with interest thereon. Out of the compensation, Rs. 50.000/- was ordered to be paid by the appellant Insurance Company and the balance amount of Rs. 33,500/- was directed to be recovered from respondents 1, 2 and 3 in the MVOP, who are respectively the driver, conductor and owner of the bus.

(2.) The appellant contends that the deceased Appukkuttan Nair was a passenger in the bus and as per the then existing provision of the Motor Vehicles Act viz., S.95(2)(b)(ii) read with sub clause (4) of the Act the liability of the Insurance Company is only to the extent of Rs. 5,000/-. This contention was raised before the Court below, but the learned Tribunal rejected this contention and held that in view of the decision in Motor Owners Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jadavji Keshavji Modi and Others (1981 AIR (SC) 2059) the liability of the Insurance Company is to the extent of Rs. 50,000/-. This finding of the Tribunal is challenged by the appellant.

(3.) We heard counsel for the appellant, counsel for respondents and also counsel for owner of the bus which had involved in the accident.