SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 582

2004(3) Supreme 732
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Allahabad High Court)
S.N. Variava & H.K. Sema, JJ.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. -Appellant
versus
Kiran Singh & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5463 of 1998
With
Civil Appeal No. 3783 of 1999
Decided on 28-4-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Pranab Kumar Mullick, Niraj Singh and K.K. Gupta (N.P.), Advocates.
For the Respondents : Naresh Kumar Sharma, Shrish Kumar Misra, Panab Kumar Mullick and Niraj Singh, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Insurance Company is not capable to challenge the quantum of compensation.

Headnote:(i) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988-Sections 147 and 149-Motor accident award-Victim died in motor accident while travelling in a bus-Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 6,25,000/- with interest and awarded was maintained in appeal by High Court but interest reduced from 12% to 9% p.a.-Insurer s appeal that by an endorsement affixed on policy, premium paid by owner restricted its liability to Rs. 30,000/- per passenger-Appellant had failed to lead any evidence to prove that copy of policy filed by it was genuine-Concurrent finding on the fact could not be interfered with-Bank Manager produced copy of policy when examined by vehicle owner and that copy did not contain such endorsement as the one pleaded by appellant-No infirmity in findings recorded by Courts below. (Para 3)

       (ii) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988-Section 166-Victim deceased was Assistant Engineer drawing salary of Rs. 2384.5 was aged 27 years-In claim petition filed by wife Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 6,25,000/- with interest at 12% by applying multiplier of 43-High Court upheld award but reduced interest to 9%-Insurer s appeal-High Court was of view that if multiplier was reduced and multiplicand was enhanced not much difference would be caused to the amount fixed by Tribunal-No interference was warranted particularly when Insurance Company was not capable to challenge the quantum of compensation. (Para 4)

       

JUDGMENT

H.K. Sema, J.-These two appeals arise from the same judgment and order and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. Civil Appeal No. 5463 of 1998 had been filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. against the Award and Civil Appeal No. 3783 of 1999 had been filed by the claimants for the enhancement.

2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:-

A young Assistant Engineer aged about 27 years had died in a motor accident on 10.1.1988 while travelling in a bus bearing registration No. URN 9428. The said bus was insured with the appellant-company. At the time of death the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. 2384.50 p. The claim petition was filed by the wife of the deceased. The policy issued on 19.5.1987 was comprehensive and was valid till 18.5.1998. The Tribunal after considering the evidence and the insurance policy awarded a sum of Rs. 6,25,000/- as compensation payable by the appellant-company along with 12% interest per annum upto date. On appeal, being filed by the appellant, the High Court after hearing both the parties at length maintained the Award granted by the Tribunal but reduced the rate of interest to 9% per annum instead of 12%. Aggrieved thereby the present appeal has been preferred by the Insurance Company.

Counsel for the appellant-company argued that the original policy issued by the appellant-company had an endorsement affixed to it by which "I.M.T. 13" was incorporated as a term of the policy and, therefore, the premium paid by the owner could fetch only to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation per passenger. It is argued that the premium amount paid was Rs. 1290/- covering the risk of 43 passengers and, therefore, the amount per passenger comes to Rs. 30/- and as per the Indian Motor Tariff Rules the liability of the company is only to the extent of Rs. 30,000/- per passenger. It is further argued that the company had filed true copy of the policy before the Tribunal in which there is an endorsement "I.M.T. 13", but both the Tribunal and the High Court have committed an error in placing reliance on the copy of the policy which was produced by the bank manager, in which there was no endorsement "I.M.T. 13" as in the case of the copy of the policy produced by the appellant-company.

3. The above submission had been repelled by both the Tribunal and the High Court. Both the Courts below have concurrently held that the appellant had not led any evidence to prove that the policy document which was filed by the appellant along with the written statement was genuine and the same was issued to the insured. There is no dispute that the appellant-company failed to lead any evidence to prove that the copy of the policy filed by the company was genuine. Such concurrent findings of fact based on appreciation of evidence cannot be interfered with. There is a categorical finding by both the courts below that the so-called insurance policy filed by the appellant-company had not been proved, as no evidence was led by the company. Both the courts below have concurrently held, based on evidence, that the copy of the so-called policy produced by the appellant in absence of proof thereof cannot be treated as a valid document and cannot be relied upon. Such concurrent findings of facts based on appreciation of evidence cannot be termed as erroneous, which would warrant our interference, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136. Similarly, both the courts below have relied upon the carbon copy of the policy, which was handed over to the bank at the time of insurance of the vehicle, produced by the bank manager. The bank manager was examined by the owner and in his statement he had categorically stated that the policy document is one which the bank had received in token of the insurance of the vehicle through the appellant-company. Keeping in view the statement of the bank manager which proved that the carbon copy is indicia of the original copy of the policy, both the courts below were justified in acc









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top