UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. R.CHOWLIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 2nd respondent -insurer of the crime vehicle, i.e. Jeep bearing No.AP 21 4899 belongs to 1st respondent to the claim petition in O.P.No.366 of 2002 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal -cum -IV Additional District Judge (FTC), Anantapur filed the appeal impugning the award in the claim petition filed by six dependents on the deceased by name R.Seve Naik, aged more than 55 years (as per Ex.A3 Post Mortem certificate), questioning the compensation awarded by the tribunal of Rs.67,000/ - with interest @ 6 % per annum out of the claim of 1,60,000/ - and to dismiss the claim against the 2nd respondent as the crime vehicle was used for hire purpose by violating the terms of the policy as well as the statute.

(2.) HEARD the learned standing counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 6. Though, notice was sent to 7th respondent, but returned unserved for want of correct address and thus, the claim against 7th respondent is dismissed for default on 25.01.2010. (Since no further notice taken, the claim against him is dismissed for default.) The dismissal of the appeal against the 7th respondent owner is no bar to the maintainability of the appeal as per the division bench Judgment of the High Court in M.Chakradhar Rao v. Y.Babu Rao1. Thus the appeal is taken up for hearing to decide on merits. Perused the material on record. The parties hereinafter are referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience in the appeal.

(3.) NOW the points that arise for consideration in the appeal are: 1. Whether the tribunal was erred in fixing joint and several liability against the insurer to indemnify the insured/owner of the jeep and if so, the award of the tribunal is liable to be set aside? 2. To what result? POINT -1: