Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance ... vs Vasanthapurani on 24 March, 2023
Author: A.S. Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. of 2023
(arising out of SLP(C) No. 18739/2017)
ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
VASANTHAPURANI & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 5.
3. Respondent No.6, though served, has remained absent.
4. The short issue for consideration in this appeal is with regard to the liability to pay the compensation.
5. From the appeal papers, it is noted that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short ‘MACT’) through its judgment and award dated 11.11.2013, has awarded a sum of Rs.7,13,000/- with interest, to the claimants.
6. In the appeal filed by the Insurance Company before the High Court, though, no appeal was preferred on behalf Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by of the claimants, the material available on record was Nisha Khulbey Date: 2023.03.27 17:30:01 IST Reason: assessed and through the judgment dated 04.01.2017 passed by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in CMA MD 2 No. 1464/2016, the compensation was enhanced to Rs. 19,50,000/- with interest. However, the liability aspect was not adverted to by the High Court since, the High Court was of the opinion that the appeal is limited to the aspect of negligence.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant would, however, bring to our notice that the contention about the liability was urged by the Insurance Company in the objection statement filed before the MACT itself wherein, it had been specifically indicated that though, the policy was issued on 11.07.2010, the cheque given by the insurer towards the premium was dishonoured on 17.07.2010 and as such, the cancellation of the policy would be with effect from 11.07.2010 and policy would be non est. In that view, it was contended by them that the Insurance Company is not liable to reimburse the compensation in respect of the accident which had occurred on 13.07.2010.
8. Having taken note of the said contention put forth in the objection statement and pressed into service by the learned counsel for the appellant before us, we are clear on the aspect that in so far as the liability of the Insurance Company as against the third party claimant would still subsist and would have to be paid by them.
9. However, in so far as the insured is concerned, keeping in view the fact that the premium has not been realised by the Insurance Company as the cheque was dishonoured on 17.07.2010, it would be open to the 3 Insurance Company to pay the compensation to the respondent nos. 1 to 5 herein, who are the claimants and recover the same from the owner (Respondent No.6) who was the proposed insured, but the policy did not come to existence.
10. Hence, reserving such liberty to the appellant to recover the amount from the owner of the vehicle after paying to the claimants, the appeal stands disposed of.
11. In view of the above, the appellant-Insurance Company shall deposit the balance amount with interest before the MACT within six weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. The MACT shall disburse the same as per procedure.
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
...................J. (A.S. BOPANNA) ...................J. (MANOJ MISRA) New Delhi 24th March, 2023 4 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.12 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 18739/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in CMAMD No. 1464/2016 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras At Madurai) ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Petitioner(s) VERSUS VASANTHAPURANI & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.66266/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS and IA No.67713/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS Date : 24-03-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. G. Balaji, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Naresh Kumar, AOR Mr. S. Nandakumar, Adv.
Ms. Deepika Nandakumar, Adv.
Mr. Anand Murthi Rao, Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Gupta, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NISHA KHULBEY) (DIPTI KHURANA) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(signed order is placed on the file)