LAWS(APH)-2012-10-37

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. VEMPADA RAMU

Decided On October 05, 2012
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Appellant
V/S
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a ghastly accident that occurred on 13.02.2004, when lorry bearing registration No.AP 31T 9698 fell from Simhachalam Hill, Visakhapatnam into the Valley, as many as 19 persons suffered from the accident. While 11 persons died in the accident, seven persons including a child of four years old sustained injuries. Various claimants, either as the injured or as dependents of the deceased filed cases under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act, for short) or under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act seeking compensation for the injuries that they sustained or for the death that their relatives. Some cases under the provisions of the M.V. Act came up before the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam. Some other cases came up before the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District Judge [Fast Tract Court (FTC)], Visakhapatnam. Each Tribunal disposed of the cases before it, through separate orders. The insurer of the lorry preferred appeals in as many as seven of these cases. As the question of the negligence and the question of the liability of the insurer are common in all these cases, all the appeals are jointly disposes of, through this common judgment.

(2.) All the claims were laid under Section 163-A of M.V. Act. The advocate for the appellants in all the cases is one and the same. The counsel for all the claimants is also one and the same.

(3.) MOP No.605 of 2007 was filed before the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-VII Additional District Judge (FTC), Visakhapatnam. The claimant sought compensation at Rs.1,00,000/- on the ground that he sustained injuries in the said accident. The Tribunal awarded compensation Rs.52,000/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum. The insurer as well as the owner of the vehicle were held liable jointly and severally. MA CMA No.60 of 2011 is filed against this case by the insurer questioning the liability.