Insurance liability is contingent on the effective date of coverage as defined in the insurance policy, which prevails over the timing of premium receipt.

JUDGMENT :

RAVI V. HOSMANI, J.

1. MFA No.203891/2023 is filed challenging judgment and award dated 27.06.2023 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, (for short ‘tribunal) in MVC no.1005/2018.

2. MFA No.204209/2023 is filed challenging judgment and award dated 27.06.2023 passed by Motor Accident Claims HC-KAR Tribunal and III Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi, in MVC no.1004/2018.

3. Both appeals are by insurer and as they arise out of same accident, challenge by insurer is on same grounds, for sake of convenience, specific facts in MFA no.203891/2023 would be referred to.

4. Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi, learned counsel submitted that appeals were by insurers challenging judgment and award passed by Tribunal on liability only. It was submitted, as per claimant, on 23.06.2017, when claimant- Raghavendra was driving car bearing registration no.KA- 02/MA-3515 with his friend Gopal as passenger, near Ambedkar Bhavan, Kalaburagi, driver of offending car bearing registration no.MH-12/GF-6756 drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against claimant’s car. In accident, claimant and his friend sustained injuries and took treatment at Vaatsalya Hospital, Kalaburagi. Despite taking treatment, he did not recover fully, sustained physical disability and consequent loss of earning capacity. Therefore, he filed claim HC-KAR petition under Section 166 of MOTOR VEHICLES ACT against owner and insurer of offending car.

5. On service of notice, owner and insurer entered appearance and opposed petition. In its objections, insurer denied age, occupation and income of claimant as well as manner of occurrence of accident. It was specifically contended that accident occurred on 23.06.2017 and as insurer had issued policy with coverage beginning from 24.06.2017, insurer was not liable to pay compensation. Even contention about driver not holding valid and effective driving licence was also urged.

6. Based on pleadings, Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence. Claimant examined himself and Dr.Ravi E.Shivaraya as PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P16. On other hand, insurer examined its official as RW.1 and got marked Exs.R1 and R2.

7. On consideration, Tribunal held issue no.1 in affirmative, issue no.2 partly in affirmative and issue no.3 by allowing claim petition in part holding claimant entitled for compensation of Rs.3,40,400/- with interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit. It also held insurer HC-KAR would be entitled to recover compensation after paying same to claimant.

8. Aggrieved by said award, insurer had filed appeal.

9. It was submitted, occurrence of accident involving insured vehicle due to rash and negligent driving by its driver and claimant sustaining grievous injuries therein resulting in physical disability leading to loss of earning capacity were not in dispute. It was submitted, as per police investigation records, namely Exs.P1 to P5, accident occurred at 6.45 p.m., in evening. Owner of offending car purchased insurance policy after accident. It was submitted, though Ex.R1-insurance policy indicated date of issuance as 23.06.2017, period of coverage was specifically mentioned as commencing from 24.06.2017 to 23.06.2018. It was submitted, Ex.R2 indicated time of payment of insurance premium as 8.27 p.m., which would be after accident in question. Relying upon decisions