ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. SANGEETHA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Oriental insurance Company is the appellant in the above appeal challenging the award and decree dated 22.11.2004 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 87 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Vellore. It is a case of an injury. The accident in this case happened on 12.1.1994. According to the injured claimant Sangeetha, on 12.01.1994, at about 12'o clock, when she was standing near her land at Kuppathamottu Village adjacent to the road of Tiruvalam - Pittithakku, the tempo van bearing registration No. TCJ 5122 running from Tiruvalam to Vellore from east to west, being driven very rashly and negligently on the extreme left side, dashed the petitioner on her back and ran over her right leg. In the said accident, the claimant's right leg above bottom was broken. The injured claimant was taken to CMC Hospital, Vellore, where she has undertaken treatment for six months as inpatient. According to the claimant, the accident had left her with 50% permanent disability and hence, she claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - as compensation from both the respondents, the 1st respondent being the owner of the tempo van and the 2nd respondent being the insurer of the said vehicle.

(2.) IN support of the claim, the injured claimant had examined herself as P.W. 1 and the Doctor as P.W. 2. Exs. P -1 to P -5 were marked, the details of which are as follows:

(3.) BEFORE the Tribunal, the appellant insurance company took a stand that the accident had not occurred in the place and manner as alleged by the claimant and that the injury suffered by the claimant was due to the fact that she had poked her leg into a two wheeler. In support of such contention, the appellant had chosen to examine one Ramesh, Insurance Investigator as R.W. 1 and his report is marked as Ex. R. 1. However, in view of the fact that the driver of the tempo traveller had admitted his guilt of causing accident in C.C. No. 110 of 1994, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had in fact occurred as spoken to by P.W. 1 - the claimant and proceeded to fix the compensation.