NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MUJAVAR PATIMOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is arising out of the order dated 29.07.2005 in M.V.O.P. No.1250 of 2002 on the file of the Court of Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge (FTC), Guntur (for short, 'the Tribunal').

(2.) This is an appeal filed by the National Insurance Company Limited, the second respondent in M.V.O.P. No.1250 of 2002. The said Original Petition was filed by the respondents 1 to 5 herein, the legal representatives of the deceased Mujawar Chansa @ Chan Saheb claiming compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of his death in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 05.09.2002.

(3.) On the fateful day, the deceased was traveling along with other passengers in the tractor of the sixth respondent - owner from Kothapalem to Guntur carrying beans bags for the purpose of marketing the same at Guntur market. When the tractor reached near Hose Ganeshpadu turning, the driver of the crime vehicle turned the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the link between the tractor and the trailor was broken and the tractor fell down in its right side, as a result of which, the deceased and the co-travellers fell under the bags of beans bags and sustained grievous injuries. The deceased was shifted to G.G.H., Guntur, and from there, to Vennela Nursing Home, Guntur, where he succumbed to injuries on 24.09.2002 during treatment. The appellant herein filed the written statement and additional written statement before the Tribunal denying the liability, age, occupation and income of the deceased and also the delay of 196 days in lodging the complaint about the accident. It is further averred that instead of one person, six persons have traveled in the tractor by violating the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is also averred that the driver of the tractor was also not having the valid and effective driving licence and the tractor was not in a good condition to ply and as such the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is also averred that the compensation claimed by the claimants is excessive.