Smt Jeyaseeli vs Sriram Gen Ins Co.Ltd on 17 September, 2019

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Jeyaseeli vs Sriram Gen Ins Co.Ltd on 17 September, 2019

Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar

                                  MFA No.4681/2016

                           1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

                       BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

                 MFA No.4681 OF 2016
BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. JEYASEELI
       W/O LATE JESU MUPANAR,
       AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,

2.     SHRI JAYARAJ
       S/O LATE JESU MUPANAR,
       AGEDA BOUT 51 YEARS,

       RESIDING AT
       NO.58, ODAI STREET,
       SANKARANN KOIL MANDALAM,
       SANKARANN KOIL TALUK,
       TIRUNALVEL DISTRICT,
       TAMIL NADU.
                                       ...APPELLANTS

(BY SHRI PRAKASH M.H., ADV.,)

AND:

1.     SRIRAM GEN.INS.CO. LTD.,
       MONORCH CHAMBERS,
       INFANTRY ROAD,
                                         MFA No.4681/2016

                              2


      BANGALORE-01.

2.    MARIYAPPA S.,
      S/O SIDDAGANGAIAH,
      K.G.SRINIVASAPURA,
      SOMPURA POST,
      NELAMANGALA TALUK,
      BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 123.
                                   ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI B.PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R1
    SHRI K.N.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADV., FOR R2)


      THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT   AGAINST    THE    JUDGMENT    AND    AWARD    DATED
10.08.2015 PASSED IN MVC.NO.5287/2013 ON THE FILE
OF THE 18TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES,     MEMBER,     MACT-4,    BENGALURU,      PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.


      THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

                         ORDER

The claimants before the Tribunal have filed this appeal challenging the finding recorded by the MFA No.4681/2016 3 Tribunal that insurer is not liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle and to pay compensation.

2. Shri Prakash M.H., learned advocate for the appellants submits that the offending vehicle is a medium goods vehicle. The Tribunal has recorded in paragraph No.28 of the impugned judgment that the driver of the offending vehicle had license to drive the light motor vehicle, transport vehicle and public service bus. However, the Tribunal has mis-directed itself with regard to medium goods vehicle. It has erroneously held that the driver of the medium goods vehicle requires a special license to drive the goods vehicle.

3. Shri B.Pradeep, learned advocate for respondent No.1-Insurance Company in his usual MFA No.4681/2016 4 fairness submits that the driver of the offending vehicle did possess a valid license which authorized him to drive the vehicle in question.

4. In view of the submission made by learned advocate for the insurer, this appeal must succeed.


Hence, the following

                           ORDER

     (i)       Appeal is allowed.

     (ii)      The       judgment       and      award      dated

10.08.2015 is set aside sofar as the finding with regard to liability is concerned.

(iii) Respondent No.1-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount MFA No.4681/2016 5 within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

(iv) The Tribunal shall disburse the amount as directed in the award in accordance with law.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE PB

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court