IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY M.A.C.M.A.No.542 of 2019 DATE: 11.02.2026 Between:

M/s. United India Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep. by its Divl. Manager, Divisional office 6-73/ 1, Balaji Complex, Gangareddy Road, Mancherial, Adilabad Dist.

…..Appellant AND Smt. B. Indira and three others ….Respondents

JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the appellant-insurance company, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,challenging the judgment and decree dated 03.04.2018 passed in M.V.O.P.No.365 of 2015 by the Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Adilabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”), whereby a total compensation of Rs.5,21,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization was awarded to the claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein for the death of the deceased, Late B. Pramod, in a motor accident.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 01.07.2014, the deceased was proceeding as a rider on a motorcycle bearing registration No.AP15BA-3305 near FCI Godown, Mancherial at about 11:00 PM, when he allegedly lost control of the vehicle due to the focus light of an opposite vehicle and dashed against a road divider. As a result, he sustained head injuries and died on the spot. Subsequently, the police of Mancherial Police Station registered Crime No.286 of 2014 under Section 304-A IPC and filed a final report as action abated. The claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, being the parents of the deceased, filed the aforesaid claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of the deceased. 3. Before the Tribunal, the appellant-insurance company contested liability, alleging that the deceased was the author of the accident, that he was not covered under the policy conditions, and disputed age, income, occupation, and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. The Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence, concluded that although the deceased was the rider and author of the accident, the claimants-respondent Nos.1 and 2were entitled to compensation under Section 163-A of the Act since the insurance policy was in force on the date of the accident and covered third-party risk, including death of the rider and awarded total compensation of Rs.5,21,000/-with interest @ 9% per annum to the claimants-

respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein,holding the respondents therein jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant- insurance company contended that the Tribunal’s award is unsustainable as it failed to properly consider the lack of direct evidence regarding the deceased’s age, income, and occupation, ignored absence of legal heir certificate and wrongly held the insurer liable when the deceased was himself the author of the accident and not covered under the policy conditions. Learned Standing Counsel further contended that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% per annum was excessive and as such prayed to set aside the impugned award.

5. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants, on the other hand, contended that the deceased died in a motor accident while riding the insured vehicle, the insurance policy was in force at the time of the accident, and therefore the insurer was liable to satisfy the award. Learned counsel also supported the Tribunal’s assessment of compensation and the award of interest.

6. With regard to the issue of negligence, the Tribunal has considered the pleadings and evidence before it and reached a considered conclusion that the accident occurred in the manner alleged, and the respondents discharged their evidentiary burden to warrant a finding of liability. There is no material before this Court to disturb the Tribunal’s finding on negligence.

7. As regards the insurance coverage and liability, it is an admitted position supported by the documentary evidence that on the d