UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. N. JAGANNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals are preferred by the self-same Insurer-2nd respondent out of two respondents including owner of Maruthi van bearing No.AP 9 D 8833 in all the three claim petitions viz; O.P.No.682 of 2007(subject matter of MACMA No.915 of 2010) filed by parents of the deceased-Abhilash for compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-; O.P.No.670 of 2007 (subject matter of MACMA No.209 of 2010) filed by one of the injured claimants-K. Shanth Kumar for compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- and O.P.No.669 of 2007 (subject matter of MACMA No.172 of 2010) filed by another injured claimant-Jagannath for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- on the file of the learned Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum II Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad (for short, 'the tribunal') under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act,1988 (for short, 'the Act'), impugning the respective awards-dated 02.11.2009 in O.P.No.669 of 2007, since granted compensation of Rs.78,952/- out of Rs.2,00,000/-, dated 09.10.2009 in O.P.No.682 of 2007 of Rs.3,21,000/- out of Rs.5,00,000/- and dated 02.11.2009 in O.P.No.670 of 2007 of Rs.5,42,185/- out of Rs.7,00,000/- fixing joint liability in all the claim petitions.

(2.) The common contentions in the grounds of the three appeals of the appellant-Insurer are that the tribunal should have held that the Insurer is not liable for payment of any compensation because the accident occurred due to the fault of the rider of the motor bike with triple riding and for no fault of driver of Maruti van as the Ex.A.6 rough sketch and the Ex.A.2 charge sheet and the Ex.A.5 MVI report column No.8 all if read together show that the rider of the motor bike himself dashed the Maruthi van on the right side, that the tribunal failed to observe that the rider of the motor bike was possessing only learner's license and due to the lack of skill in the triple riding that resulted the accident, that the tribunal should have dismissed the claim for neither Insurer nor owner of the van are liable, that in case of injured-K. Shanth Kumar (in O.P.No.670 of 2007) the tribunal awarding Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities of life besides awarding of Rs.3,67,200/- for 60% disability, is untenable so also awarding Rs.1,00,000/- towards artificial limb which actually costs Rs.25,000/- as per the evidence of R.W.2 doctor examined by the Insurer, that 25% of the award amount to be reduced towards the contributory negligence in all the appeals and also in view of the triple riding and hence, to set aside the three awards by exonerating the Insurer by allowing the appeals.

(3.) The three matters since arisen out of same accident and with common contentions in the appeals, these are taken up for common hearing and disposal.