LAWS(GJH)-2010-12-85

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. LATIFABIBI

Decided On December 15, 2010
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. Appellant
V/S
LATIFABIBI WD/O AHMED ABDULLA RAGADIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against judgement and award dated 16.02.1996 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 842 of 1987 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kheda at Nadiad, whereby the claim petition was partly allowed.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that on 10.02.1987, at about 12.30 p.m. deceased Ahmed Abdulla Ragadia was returning to Godhra from Nadidad by driving his motor-truck No. GRY 3371. He had parked his truck near Maholel Patia on the left had side of the road and when he was stepping out from the truck, one motor truck bearing No. GTE 7165 came with excessive speed on wrong side of the road, dashed with the deceased, knocked him down. Resultantly, he received serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Latifabibi wd/o Ahmed Abdulla Ragaida has filed application before the Tribunal for getting compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/-. Initially the claim was for Rs. 2,15,000/- and was enhanced to Rs. 3,50,000/- as per order below Exh. 27. THE Tribunal, after considering the entire material on record, awarded compensation of Rs. 2,15,000/- with 12 per cent running interest from the date of application till realization and proportionate costs from all the opponents jointly and severally. THE United India Insurance Co. Ltd.- applicant herein has filed this appeal challenging the said award. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) IN my opinion, the premium of Rs. 240/- has been paid towards the liability to Public Risk. If the premium was charged for ?Act Policy? liability, it should have been Rs. 200/- only but if the premium was charged of Rs. 240/- then it will be deemed that there was specific agreement between the insured and insurer to undertake the liability to pay the public risk. Therefore, the INsurance Company cannot escape from its liability to make full payment of compensation to the claimant, including cost and interest. IN view of the above, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed.