M/S United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Kum Shobha on 8 July, 2011

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Kum Shobha on 8 July, 2011

Bench: Subhash B.Adi

"Mk

IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT..:3g:gx;{G;é;LQR§:}: "  

DATED THIS THE am D;;iY :j 1f%';{Lj':,Y¢;%G--:   A  :'
BE_FaORE1'7--A  V . .
THE Hc:>N'BLE MR.JUs-rfcsa sUB'§sAs;:-13.291

MISCELLANEOUS .FIRsT'AP:=¥1::.A L ..z\.io.s2Vi4}2oo7

BETVVEEN:

M/S United Iri1d1ja--I:1sura:ﬁc€_. 
Company Ltd,   _ _  
Branch Officfsf   
KsM.R0ad, Ch:E;kI:1a;g{alur'   '

New represenated by"*::.;   ~-

Its Dix/isaional O'ff'1_c*e_a  v

B.H.Roa&, ' " 

Shimoga " %   *  '

By its Divisibnai Manager'.  .. APPELLANT

_. _ (By en1<;afesh_,_AdV.)

1.' ~. " --K.um.'S{h--0b}da
' .'_Aged.aab"0;ut 19 years

D/0"--Go.p'ala, R/0 Kolagave Village
Jagrai-Post, Chikmagaiur Taluk

, H';;B.Putt€:gowda
.  t3',A/0 H.B1'Heg0wda
 Major, R/0 Bhagemane
Maﬁandur Post
Chikmagaiur Taiuk 8: District

3. Chandra Alias S/0 Keshava
Major, Driver,
R/Io Mallandur Pas:
Chikrnagaiur Taluk 8: District, ,. RESPONDENTS

{Bf Sr1'.N .ReR3V'ikUfH&f, Adv. fer R-W2; R4 sawed; Nstice to R3 is dispensed with} This M.F.A. is filed under Seetien 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 30.03.2007 passed in MVC [$0.350/2003 on the file of The Presiding Officer, Fa.s't'~-»Track Court ME and Member, MACTIV, Chikmagaiurg awargﬁirftg a eempensation of Rs.54,000/» with interest <3} 8% 3,21, train the date of petition an realisation. ' T " 4- This Appeal coming on for orders dehvere-ct the following:

JUDGMEhje"

This appeal is by the inattvrerf que'stt0r3irigV_the"iiabi1ity in V MA/.C.N0.35O/2003 dated 3Qr312ORQ?._or:_the.tfileefV}},:i.A.C.T.~IV, Chikmagalur.

2. The Trihu'rraI' --hae:__au{arded. of Rs.54,000/~ with interest €'te\rvﬁfartiVétZtnjburfstifferteeikbyVthe Claimant in a road accident that and held that the insurer is Iemnetoindegnngzexamxnpeggaeen.

"Case eﬁthe Vxinsvtxrer is that, vehicle which caused the fprtfaate and the claimant was an occupant in is not a third party and the insurance polieyt-.:Eoe§~ §§At:*.ve¢}.t;ve: the riek ef the claimant as it is oniy an Act

-. 2.X:é_.A;A§er Section 147 at the Motor Vehicles Act, it does not ' jeeyer,_the risk of the occupant of the private car. %2n«:»-

4; Considering the said submEssi0n§ 1 find than as far as Qccupani; in a. private car is COY1C€1'f1€ii, ir1_sur€r is not iiabie U} indemnify the liability of the owner:

Accordingly, the appeal is partly aliowegi. judgment and award is modified. The §.fi$u_:'€:r £53' h_éI:1 1i}VO':'V1ia b1e T. ' to indemnify whereas the Qwnci-1' is "3i;ab1e thgz compansation.

The amount in dep'os§;i _b€:_re{uv11€:is:d tdthe appeﬁant. ..' s:j:{:'§;:€ ' ° 3 E

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court