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

2011 Supreme(AP) 307

B.CHANDRA KUMAR
Oriental Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
S. Ramanjaneyulu – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:S.A.V. Ratnam, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R1 to R3, K. Suresh Reddy, R4, P. Ganga Rami Reddy, Advocates.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the liability of the insurer under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, when unauthorized passengers (coolies) were carried in a tractor-trailer and the policy prohibits carriage of passengers for hire or reward?

What is the effect of the Insurance Policy Ex.B-1 terms on indemnification where no additional premium was paid to cover risk of passengers?

What is the appropriate compensation payable to the husband and children of the deceased where the accident involved a tractor-trailer used for carrying workers, and the tribunal applied a multiplier of 17 with monthly income Rs.1,500?


Judgment

The Appellant, Oriental Insurance Company Limited, represented by its Branch Manager, filed this appeal challenging the award, dated 04.10.2006, in O.P.No.113 of 2005, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Anantapur, whereunder and whereby, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- by granting Rs.50,000/-to the first respondent, who is the husband of the deceased and Rs.75,000/-to the second and third respondens who are children of the deceased with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization.

2. The appellant is the second respondent before the Tribunal. The first respondent herein is the husband of the deceased and the second and third respondents are the children of the deceased before the Tribunal. The fourth respondent herein is the first respondent/driver and owner of the tractor and trailer bearing No.AP 02C 7919 and 7920.

3. The parties are referred to herein as they are arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

On 30.10.2004, the first respondent who is the owner of the tract






















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top