Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ashalata Suryakant Patil vs New India Assurance Company Ltd. on 1 May, 2023
Bench: A.S. Bopanna, Hima Kohli
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3250 OF 2023
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32016 of 2018)
ASHALATA SURYAKANT PATIL & ORS. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants as also learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company and perused the appeal papers.
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (For short `MACT’) having taken note of the contention put forth before it and having analyzed the evidence has awarded the compensation of Rs.16,81,200/- with interest @ 9% per annum through its award dated 11.11.2014. The Insurance Company assailed the award before the High Court contending that the involvement of the vehicle is not true. The High Court through its judgment dated 04.10.2018 has upheld the contention of the Insurance Company. Signature Not Verified It is in that light, the appellants are before this Court in Digitally signed by Rajni Mukhi Date: 2023.05.03 16:56:43 IST Reason: this appeal.
1 C.A. NO. 3250 OF 2023 Having heard learned counsel for the appellants as also learned counsel for the respondents, we have at the outset, adverted to the consideration made by the MACT. Insofar as involvement of the vehicle and also the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the vehicle, the issue was considered while answering issue No.1, which has been raised for consideration in that regard. With regard to the involvement of the vehicle, the claimants apart from tendering their evidence had also examined PW-3, the investigating officer who filed the charge sheet. This is for the reason that initially the details of the vehicle was not mentioned in the FIR and it was during the course of investigation the vehicle had been identified and charge sheet had been filed.
The MACT having taken note of this aspect and also having taken into consideration that the respondent No.3 who was the driver of the vehicle in question, though was notified had not appeared. Further the Insurance Company also did not take any steps to secure and examine the said driver with regard to the accident since his evidence could have clinched the issue.
Therefore, taking all these aspects into consideration and in a matter where the claimants had discharged their initial burden, the MACT had held the accident to have occurred due to negligence of the driver and the vehicle in question to be 2 C.A. NO. 3250 OF 2023 involved. The High Court however, without considering these aspects of the matter had only discarded the evidence of PW-3 since he was not the person who had conducted the investigation, though he had filed the charge sheet. Such consideration by the High Court is not justified in the facts and circumstances since the investigation and filing the charge sheet is a continuing process. Therefore, the judgment dated 04.10.2018 passed by the High Court is set aside and the Award dated 11.11.2014 passed by the MACT is restored. The respondent-insurance company shall deposit the compensation amount with interest @ 9% per annum within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, before the MACT, whereupon the compensation amount shall be disbursed to the claimants.
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [A.S. BOPANNA] ……………………………………………….J. [HIMA KOHLI] NEW DELHI;
MAY 01, 2023
3
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.12 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.32016/2018
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-10-2018 in FA No. 2829/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay At Aurangabad) ASHALATA SURYAKANT PATIL & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 174548/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 01-05-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, AOR Mr. Mahesh P. Shinde, Adv.
Ms. Rucha A. Pande, Adv.
Mr. M. Veeraragavan, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Dr. Meera Agarwal, AOR Mr. Ramesh Chandra Mishra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of signed judgment.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
(RAJNI MUKHI) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed judgment is placed on the file) 4