UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MURUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the lower Court in MCOP No.100 of 2003 dated 19.11.2003. The appellant is the insurance company, who figured as 2nd respondent before the lower Court. The first respondent was the claimant/petitioner and the second respondent was the first respondent before the Lower Court.

(2.) THE case of the first respondent as Claimant / petitioner before the lower Court would be as follows:-(i) THE petitioner was working as a lorry loading and unloading cooly. On 06.09.1999, when the petitioner and the other two coolies loaded fire wood in the lorry bearing Registration No.TDT 5676 belonged to the first respondent near Rayakottah and travelled in the said lorry to un-load the Firewood at Dharmapuri, they were proceeding to Royakottah-Dharmapuri highway and when they reached periyathebai at about 12.30 p.m., the driver of the lorry was driving the vehicle in a rash negligent manner and the lorry was toppled. THE petitioner sustained grievance injuries on his right leg ankle, simple injuries in left fore arm, left scapula, left knee, left foot and multiple injuries all over his body. THE petitioner was taken to Government Hospital at Palacode and was given first aid and thereafter, admitted as in-patient in the Government Head Quarters Hospital. He took treatment for a long period but, however, due to the mal-union of fracture on his right leg ankle, the petitioner could not walk or squat freely.(ii) THE petitioner was aged only 30 years at the time of accident and he was earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. THE petitioner could not go for any work due to the permanent disability caused to him, due to the injuries sustained in the accident. THE petitioner also suffered mental shock, pain and suffering due to the accident. He had also consulted expert doctors for his treatment. THE whole future and enjoyment of life of the petitioner was spoiled due to the accident. THE first respondent being the owner of the lorry bearing No.TDT 5676, is vicariously liable to compensate the petitioner. THE second respondent, who is a insurer of the said vehicle, is also liable to compensate the petitioner along with the first respondent under the contract of indemnity. THErefore, he would request the Court that petitioner may be awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation directing the respondents to pay the same jointly and severely with subsequent interest at 14 % per annum from the date of accident till the date of realisation and with cost.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the decision reached by the lower court, the second respondent has preferred the present appeal. On going through the contents of the petition, counter statement filed by the respondents, the judgment and award passed by the lower court and upon hearing the arguments advanced on either side, this court had framed the following points for consideration in this appeal.1. Whether the judgment and the award granting a sum of Rs.1,55,400/- with an interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation of payment are liable to be set aside or modified?. 2. To what relief, the appellant is entitled for?.