MAMINDLA PADMA Vs. KANAKADURGA LEASING AND FINANCE LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants- claimants filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') against the award, dated 30.5.2003, passed in MVOP No.807 of 2000 by the learned II Additional District Judge- cum-Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Warangal (for short 'the Tribunal').

(2.) ON 17.7.2000, at an early hours, while the husband of the first claimant, by name M. Uppalaiah, was bringing fish breed in a mini lorry bearing No.AP 10 U 1522 from Kothapet to Palakurthy Village and when it reached Veeravelli Village, its driver drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed a stationed lorry bearing No.AP 16 U 3456, as a result of which, all the inmates of the mini lorry sustained injuries and the said Uppalaiah succumbed to those injuries. The claimants being wife, minor son and parents of the deceased Uppalaiah filed OP No.807 of 2000 claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- against respondent Nos. 1 to 4 being owner, driver and insurers respectively, of the crime vehicle. Respondent No.4 filed written statement denying the allegations made in the claim petition. By the award impugned, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,16,000/- payable by respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation. For non-fastening the liability on respondent Nos.3 and 4-insurance company and for enhancement of the compensation, the appellants-claimants filed the present appeal.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4-insurance company contended that before 6.1.2004 i.e., the date of judgment in Baljit Kaur's case (supra), the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation and that after the said judgment only, the principle of pay and recovery came into existence and that as the accident occurred in 2000, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to the claimants. He further contended that the claimants are entitled to recover the amount of compensation from the owner of the vehicle and in support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Bommithi Subbhayamma, 2005 ACJ 721, wherein it was held as under: