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) 18630

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V. Sujatha, J
Oriental Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Setti Uppayya – Respondent
MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 214/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Gudi Srinivasu
For the Respondents: Siva Nagarjuna Sidhadapu, Bhanu Prasad Chukkapalli

An insurance company that provides coverage for a trailer is liable for damages arising from an accident involving the tractor-trailer combination, even if the tractor is not separately insured, as the policy effectively covers the usage for which the trailer is intended.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claim for compensation - Liability of Insurer - Trailer insured but tractor drawing it not separately insured - Where a trailer is insured and the insurer has issued the policy with knowledge that it is intended to be drawn by another motor vehicle, it is deemed that the insurer has undertaken to discharge the liability arising out of its use - Contention of insurer regarding non-liability rejected as once trailer is insured, the insurer cannot escape liability. (Para 15)

(B) Quantum of compensation - Age and Income - Determination of - Absence of documentary proof for income - Tribunal’s estimation of monthly income and application of multiplier as per established guidelines held just and proper - Inclusion of future prospects in line with settled law upheld. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
An appeal was filed by the insurance company challenging the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the husband and son of a woman who died in a motor accident involving a tractor and trailer. The insurance company contested liability on the grounds of negligence, lack of a valid license, and that the tractor itself was not insured, only the trailer.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Tribunal’s finding that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the tractor driver. It further held that the insurer of the trailer cannot avoid liability on the ground that the tractor was not insured, as it entered into the contract knowing the trailer would be towed. The compensation amount, calculated based on appropriate income, multipliers, and future prospects, was found to be just and reasonable.

Issues: The main issues were the validity of the insurance company's contention regarding its liability for a trailer-only policy and the correctness of the compensation quantum awarded by the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: An insurance company that insures a trailer is liable to indemnify the insured for accidents involving the tow vehicle, as the trailer is an accessory intended to be used with a vehicle, and the policy covers the usage thereof. Result : Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of lower court proceedings, factual background of the accident, and the grounds for appeal. (Para 1 , 10 , 11 , 12)
2. findings on negligence based on eye-witness testimony and documentary charge sheet evidence. (Para 13 , 14)
3. insurance liability for trailers when used in conjunction with a motor vehicle. (Para 15)
4. calculation of fair compensation using multipliers, future prospects, and conventional heads. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

APHC010207682023

[3333]

Appeal filed under Order 41 of CPC before the High Court pleased to set aside the decree and judgment in M V.O.P.No.354 of 2017 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, cum- 10th Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram, Dated 6th day of December, 2022, and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

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 condone the delay of 37 days in filing the M.A.C.M.A. against the decree and judgment M.V.O.P.No.354 of 2017 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,- cum- 10th Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram, Dated 6th day of December, 2022, and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

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 grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the Judgment and Decree dated 6th day of December, 2022 passed in M.V.O.P.No.354 of 2017 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,— cum- 10th Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram, including the execution proceedings , pending disposal of the main M.A.C.M.A.,and pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2023

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 Vacate the interim stay granted on 12-05-2023 in IA No. 2 of 2023 in MACMA No. 214 of 2023 on the file of the Hon'ble Court and permit the Petitioners to withdraw the amount deposited by the Respondent Insurance Company herein and pass

The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

The present appeal is filed by the Insurance Company, aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2022 passed in M.V.O.P.No.354 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram, wherein the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the claimants/respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, on account of the death of the deceased, Setti Nookaratnam, in a motor accident that occurred on 04.05.2016.

02. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal.

03. The case of the claimants, in brief, is that the 1st petitioner is the husband and the 2nd petitioner is the son of the deceased. On 04.05.2016 at about 9:00 a.m., the tractor bearing registration No.AP 01 AE 2968 along with trailer bearing registration No.AP 03 AP 7563, driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, dashed against the motorcycle bearing registration No.AP 05 BL 6237, on which the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider, near the outskirts of Velanka Village, Kirlampudi Mandal. Due to which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same on the spot. It is contended that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the tractor driver.

04. The claimants further contended that the deceased was aged about 50 years, hale and healthy, and was working as an agricultural coolie, earning about Rs.10,000/- per month, and was contributing her entire income towards the family. Due to her sudden death, they suffered loss of dependency and other conventional heads, and hence claimed compensation of Rs.7,00,000/-.

05. Before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 remained exparte.

06. Respondent No.2 filed a writte

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