BRANCH MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. KULANDHAISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Civil Miscellaneous Appeals and the Civil Revision Petition cited supra are focussed to get set aside the orders and decrees dated 31. 01. 2006 passed in M. A. C. O. P. Nos. 289 of 2000, 277 of 2000, 293 of 2000, 292 of 2000, 312 of 2000, 291 of 2000, 290 of 2000, 287 of 2000, 288 of 2000 and 325 of 2000 respectively on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - Chief judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai, which operate as against the Insurance company.

(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the first respondent. Despite printing the name of the Counsel for the second respondent/owner of the vehicle, no one appeared on behalf of the second respondent.

(3.) THE gist and kernel, the nitty-gritty, the warp and woof of the case of the appellant, Insurance Company in this appeal is that despite the Tribunal having arrived at the correct conclusion that the contention of the claimants that the insured and the deceased involved in this case were mere pedestrians and the vehicle belonging to the insurer insured with the appellant insurance company ploughed into that crowd and caused injuries and death, are all cock and bull story, yet it fell into error in giving direction to the effect that at the first instance, the Insurance Company being the insurer of the insured vehicle should pay and thereafter recover the same from the insured.