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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 1856

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Tuhin Kumar Gedela
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sanneboyina Nandini – Respondent
MACMA 3320/2017



APHC011385982016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3548]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 3320/2017 Between:

1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. POST BOX NO.19, D.NO.58-9-17, 1ST FLOOR, KAMA SASTRY STREET, SANTHAPETA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...APPELLANT AND

1. SANNEBOYINA NANDINI, W/O.LATE SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED

25 YEARS, 2. SANNEBOYINA RAKESH, S/O.LATE SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED 4 YEARS, 3. SANNEBOYINA JAGADISH VARMA, RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 BEING MINORS, REP.BY THEIR MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN LST RESPONDENT HEREIN.

4. SANNEBOYINA SESHAMMA, W/O.SUBBA RAO, AGED 55 YEARS, 5. SANNEBOYINA SUBBA RAO, S/O.VENKAIAH, AGED 61 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 ARE RESIDENTS OF D.NO.20-200, REDDYPALEM VILLAGE, KOTHAPATNAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

6. NAGARAJU KATURI, S/O.ANNADARAIAH, AGED 4Q YEARS, R/O.D.NO.6-78, KOTHAPATNAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, OWNER-CUM-DRIVER OF AUTO NO.AP-

27TU-2070.

7. SHAIK SIRAJUDDIN, S/O.RAHAMTULLAH, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.2-165, KANAPARTHI VILLAGE, N.G.PADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, OWNER-CUM-DRIVER OF AUTO NO.AP-

27TU-4303.

8. THE ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, NEAR ADDANKI BUS STAND, BESIDE PETROL BUNK, ONGOLE TOWN, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC praying the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order passed in M.V.O.P.No.283 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Before the I Additional District Judge, Prakasam, at Ongole, dated 6th October, 2015 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2016(MACMAMP 4723 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to codone the delay of 271 days in filing the MACMA against the Judgment and award in MV OP NO.283 of 2013 on the file of the court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- before the I Additional District Judge, Prakasam, at Ongole dated: 6th day of October, 2015 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2016(MACMAMP 5692 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant stay of operation of the decree and judgment in MVOP No.283/2013 on the file of the court of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal before the I Additional District Judge, Prakasam, at Ongole dated 6th day of October, 2015 pending disposal of the main MACMA IA NO: 1 OF 2017(MACMAMP 3036 OF 2017 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased vacate the interim stay granted on 05.12.2016 passed in MACMAMP No.5692/2016 in MACMASR No.36643/2016 in the interest of justice Counsel for the Appellant:

1. K MADHUSUDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMACHANDRAREDDY GADI

2. VENKATESWARLU SANISETTY

3. S PRANATHI The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

Heard, the learned Counsel for the Oriental Insurance Company, Sri Pathi Siva Prasad, learned Counsel representing Sri Venkateswarlu Sanisetty, learned Counsel for the Claimants, and Ms.A.Mahathi, learned Counsel representing Smt.S.Pranathi, learned Counsel for the

8th respondent-ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company.

2. Aggrieved by the order, dated 06.10.2015, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Ongole in M.V.O.P.No.283 of 2013, the present appeal is filed by the appellant-

Oriental Insurance Company Limited.

3. Parties are arrayed as arrayed in the present appeal.

4. The contour of facts of the case is that the claimants, who are Respondent Nos.1 to 5, are the dependents of the deceased, Sambasiva Rao. The deceased met with a fatal road accident on 02.01.2013 at about 11.30 P.M., near Sai Baba Temple a

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