Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
UMESH M ADIGA
Branch Manager, Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sulthana Khanum @ Sultana, W/O Irshad Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
UMESH M. ADIGA, J.
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company (Respondent No.1) challenging the judgment and award dated 18th September 2013, passed by the XIX Addl.Small Causes Judge, MACT and XLI Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru (SCCH-17), (for short `Tribunal), in MVC.No.5131/2012.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that, on 24.06.2012, the deceased Irshad Khan, who was the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-01-2552, was proceeding from Doddaballapur towards Yelahanka. When he was crossing the road near Nagenahalli Gate in front of Shanimahathma Temple, he stopped the lorry to give tappal papers to the Sales Tax Officer, at that time, a Tata Indica car bearing registration No.KA-03-AA-2836, came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the deceased. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and died at the spot.
4. It is further the case of the claimants that the deceased was aged 34 years at the time of the accident; He was the driver of the lorry and earning Rs.15,000/- per month; Claimants are the wife, sons and parents of the deceased; They wer
The court clarified that insurer remains liable despite alleged license violations and that proper evaluation of compensation must consider future income potential and dependency of family members.
Accident - Driving license - Validity of - Onus would shift on the insurance company only after owner of the offending vehicle pleads and proves the basic facts within his knowledge that the driver o....
The court clarified the calculation of compensation including the age and income of the deceased, establishing liability of the insurer in absence of valid license proof.
Insurance Company remains liable for compensation despite the rider's lack of a valid driving license; compensation must account for future prospects and personal expenses.
Point of Law : Insurer can take the defence that at the time of the accident, driver was having invalid/fake licence, however, the onus of proving that the Insured did not take adequate care and caut....
The Insurance Company is liable for compensation if it cannot prove the driver lacked a valid license at the time of the accident.
Accident – Licence - Liability of insurance company – When liable - Claimants are entitled to revised compensation in amount of amount along with interest @ 7.5 per annum from date of filing of claim....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
