Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
IFFICOTOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Md. Jameel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J.
1. Heard Mr. Kondadi Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for appellant-insurance company. None appears on behalf of the respondent/claimant.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-Insurance Company challenging the award passed by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak (for short ‘Tribunal’) in M.V.O.P.No.29 of 2015, dated 28.07.2021, seeking to set-aside the award passed against the insurance company and though liability is not finally challenged, but the main ground of challenge was the quantum of compensation.
3. The Tribunal after due enquiry has partly allowed the above MVOP filed by the respondent No.1/claimant, and awarded compensation of Rs.4,64,973/- against a claim of Rs.8,00,000/-.
4. The brief factual matrix of the present appeal is as under.
4.1. On 08.10.2012 at about 1400 hours, the respondent No.2/claimant and his friend were proceeding on their motorcycle bearing registration No.AP-10-AS-9174 from Sangareddy towards Parigi. When they reached near Pulimamidi village after curve road, one auto bearing registration No.AP-28-TE-1320 (hereinafter referred to as ‘crime veh
The insurance company failed to substantiate its challenge against the Tribunal's compensation award, which was justified based on the evidence presented regarding negligence and injury.
The court upheld the Tribunal's findings on negligence and compensation, affirming that the awarded amount was just and reasonable based on the evidence presented.
The main legal point established is the assessment of compensation in road traffic accident cases based on the claimant's injuries, loss of income, and future income, considering the nature of injuri....
The court's decision emphasized the assessment of evidence, nature of injuries, and disability in determining the appropriate compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Acquittal in criminal case does not negate civil liability, and the Tribunal's assessment of income and application of multiplier were justified.
The court affirmed that compensation should account for future prospects with a 50% addition for a permanent employee and rejected claims of contributory negligence due to insufficient evidence.
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
