IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Bajekar Rahul And 3 Others – Respondent
MACMA 7/2023
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
* * * *
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
M.A.C.M.A.Nos.7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 40,
47, 86, 129, 644, 650, 651, 659 and 680 of 2023
DATE: 31.12.2025
Between
M/s. Shriram General Insurance Company Limited
…Appellant/respondent No.4
AND
Bajekar Rahul S/o Bajekar Ganapathi and others
…Respondent No.1/petitioner
COMMON JUDGMENT:
Since all these appeals arise out of the same accident, they are
being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Heard Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, learned counsel for the
appellant-Shriram General Insurance Company Limited in MACMA
Nos.7, 8, 9, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 86, 129, 10, 11, 38, 40 and 47 of
2023 and respondent-Shriram General Insurance Company Limited in
MACMA Nos.650, 659 and 680 of 2023, Sri Kuriti Vijaya Prem Swami
Naidu, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants in MACMA Nos.650,
644, 651, 659 and 680 of 2023 and respondents-claimants in MACMA
Nos.7, 8, 10, 11, 38, 40 and 47 of 2023, Sri K.Madhusudhan Reddy,
##PAGE2##2
learned counsel for the respondent–Oriental Insurance Company
Limited, Sri Akkam Eshwar and Sri P.Radhive Reddy, learned counsel
for the respondents-claimants in MACMA Nos.9, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36,
86 and 129 of 2023 and Ms.P.Satya Manjula, learned counsel for the
respondent No.2 in MACMA No.644 of 2023.
3. Some of the Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed
by the Insurance Company and some are filed by the claimants
assailing the orders dated 29.08.2022 passed by the learned Chairman,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-I Additional District Judge,
Nizamabad, (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in the respective M.V.O.Ps.
4. The parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the
MVOPs.
5. The facts leading to filing of the MVOPs are that on 14.05.2016,
the respective deceased and the injured persons belonging to one
family were travelling in an Auto bearing No.TS 01 UA 5328 from
Navipet Village to Adelli Temple at Sarangapur Village, and when the
auto reached Haryali Petrol Bunk at 10.50. pm, a Tipper Lorry bearing
No.AP 26 TC 0699, with the load of concrete stones, drove by its driver
in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, dashed the Auto in the
opposite direction, as a result of which, out of 17 inmates of the Auto,
15 have died on the spot and the other two persons sustained grievous
injuries.
##PAGE3##3
6. Therefore, the claimants approached the Tribunal by way of
filing respective MVOPs claiming different amounts towards
compensation along with interest.
7. The Insurance Company, who was impleaded in all the MVOPs
before the Tribunal, has contested the MVOPs by filing a written
statement, whereas the owners of the Auto and Tipper Lorry were set
exparte. The Insurance Company denied the contentions raised by the
claimants and stated that 17 members were travelling in an auto,
wherein only 4 members were permitted, and on account of overload,
the accident occurred. It is also stated that by inducting 17 persons,
the owner of the auto violated the insurance policy. It is further stated
that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the Tipper
Lorry, and therefore, the Insurance Company denied its liability.
8. Basing on the pleadings, the Tribunal framed certain issues for
its consideration. Before the Tribunal, the parties led evidence, both
oral as well as documentary to establish their case.
9. The Tribunal, taking into consideration various factual aspects,
partly allowed some claims granting various amounts towards
compensation. Aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company filed
these appeals.
10. Learned counsel for the Shriram Insurance Company submits
that the learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated the legal
##PAGE4##4
defences raised by the appellant in the written statement. It is further
contended that the Tribunal ought to have seen that the accident has
occurred due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of
the Tipper Lorry alone and the complaint was given against the Tipper
Lo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.