NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KUMUDINI NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Misc. Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging the award passed by the Fourth Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri in M.A.C.T. Misc. Case No. 475/831 of 1993 -89.

(2.) THE deceased was a Government servant employed in the Department of Information Education and Communication Centres (Health Education Bureau), Directorate of Family welfare, Orissa. He was 46 years old when the fatal accident took place. At the relevant time, his monthly salary was Rs. 2,300/ -. Bereft of all unnecessary details, it is suffice to say that on 1.6.89 when the deceased was proceeding on a bicycle, the offending Truck bearing Registration number B.P.A. 3033 caused the accident and the victim died. The widow and the four minor children of the deceased filed Misc. Case No. 831 of 1989 before the Fourth M.A.C.T., Puri claiming a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/ - towards compensation. The statement of facts of the petition filed by the claimants clearly reveals that the offending vehicle belonged to respondent No. 6, and was insured with the appellant -Insurance Company. Respondent No. 6, the owner of the vehicle who was opp. party No. 1 before the Tribunal, filed a written statement admitting his ownership and stated that the vehicle was insured with the appellant - Insurance Company, Opp. party No. 2 and that the number of the Insurance Policy was 3152020300809. The factum of accident was also admitted. The appellant -opp. party No. 2 -Insurance Company in its written statement baldly repudiated the assertions made in the claim application including the averments that the vehicle was insured with the said Insurance Company. In course of hearing, the claimants examined three witnesses and exhibited eight documents to substantiate their claim whereas the appellant -company neither adduced any oral evidence nor exhibited any document. In course of trial a xerox copy of the policy was filed and a copy of the same was served on Insurance Company.

(3.) THE Insurance Company, as stated earlier, has filed this appeal. The only submission, forcefully advanced by Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant is that the Court below acted illegally in saddling the entire amount of compensation i.e. Rs. 2,63,900/ - upon the Insurance Company. It is submitted that the liability of the Insurance Company is limited and is only to an extent of Rs. 50,000/ -. Mr. Sinha also submitted that there is no evidence to show that the owner of the offending Truck had paid any additional premium for extending the liability beyond the statutory limit and the Tribunal lost sight of the said fact. It is needless to say that the appellant -Insurance Company rightly has not challenged the quantum of the award, but has only confined its arguments with regard to its limited liability.