MEKA CHAKRA RAO Vs. YELUBANDI BABU RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the alleged two divergent decisions in C.M.A. No. 588 of 1992 dated 28.7.1999 and C.M.A. No. 448 of 1991 dated 7.6.2000, the following questions are referred by the learned single Judge for a decision from the Division Bench:

(2.) The C.M.A. No. 588 of 1992 dated 28.7.1999 was dismissed by our learned brother E. Dharma Rao, J. on the ground that as the appeal was dismissed against the owner of the lorry which was involved in the accident and the claim against the insurer cannot be decided in the absence of the insured and as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sunita Rathi, 1998 ACJ 121 (SC), the liability of the insurer arises only when the liability of the insured is upheld for the purpose of indemnifying the insured under the contract of insurance.

(3.) The other C.M.A. No. 448 of 1991 was allowed by our learned brother Ghu-lam Mohammed, J. on 7.6.2000 holding that as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of A. Robert v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 2000 ACJ 252 (SC), even if the appeal was dismissed against owner of the motor vehicle (insured), the question of statutory liability of the insurance company survives in the absence of service of notice on the insured.