MACMA/495/2019 of UNITED INDIA INSURANCE Co.Ltd. Vs N MAHESH on 1 April 2026

JUDGMENT:-

1. The present appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited aggrieved by order dated 30.01.2019 in MVOP No.414 of 2014, on the file of the Chairman-cum-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they were referred before the Tribunal.

3. The petitioner filed claim petition under Section 166(1)

(a) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the rules made thereunder claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- together with interest @ 18% per annum on account of the injuries received by him in the accident that occurred 08.03.2012, in which the respondent school van bearing registration No.AP03W 9878 was involved.

4. It was the case of the petitioner that he boarded the school van on 08.03.2012, when it reached Arigela Kandriga Centre, the driver of the offending van drove the vehicle in rash and negligent manner at high speed, thereby lost control over the same and the van turned turtle. As a result, the petitioner sustained multiple bleeding injuries. Immediately, the petitioner was taken to Srikalahasthi Area Hospital for first aid and later he was shifted to Prasanth Hospital for better treatment. Subsequently, he took treatment in Elite Hospital, Tirupati.

5. It was further case of the petitioner that he had spent huge amounts towards medical expenses. A case in Crime No.13 of 2012 was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle under Section 337 IPC, on the file of B.N. Kandriga Police Station. The said crime was investigated into and charge sheet was filed in CC No.85 of 2014 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Srikalahasthi. It was further case of the petitioner that he was studying 10th standard as on the date of accident and he would not attend the school as usual due to the injuries received by him.

6. The 1st respondent/owner of the offending vehicle remand ex-parte. The 2nd respondent resisted the claim of the petitioner by filing counter affidavit. It was stated that the owner of the school van allowed more number of students than the capacity and in view of over load, the driver could not control the vehicle. It was further stated that as there was negligence on the part of the driver of the van, if at all any compensation was to be paid to the 1st respondent alone is liable to pay the same. It was further contended that the 2nd respondent will indemnify the insured subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, and the driver had a valid driving license, registration certificate and permit. It was further contended that the claim made by the petitioner was excessive.

7. In order to prove the case of the petitioner that he has examined as PW-1 and he also examined the Doctors, who treated him as PWs-2 & 3. He also marked Exs.A1 to A4. On the other hand, the 2nd respondent examined RWs-1 & 2 and marked copy of the Insurance policy. Further, the petitioner marked Exs.X1 to X5 through the witnesses. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,29,233/- together with interest @ 9% from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

8. Heard counsel for the appellant and counsel for respondent No.1. Despite service of notice, there is no appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.

9. Perused the material available on record.

10. Though server grounds were raised in the appeal, during the course of hearing the counsel for the appellant confined his arguments against the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal by contending that the same is excessive and the petitioner is not entitled to receive the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

11. A perusal of the record, the insurance company has examined RW-1 & 2 on its behalf. On a reading of the evidence of RW-1 & 2, it is clear that they have deposed in relation to the nature of accident and the terms and conditions of the policy, which will not help to substantiate the contention of insurance company, so as to prove the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive. On the other hand, the petitioner himself was examined as PW-1, who reiterated the averments of the claim petition. Further, on perusal of Exs.A1 to A4, it is clear that the petitioner sustained injuries in the accident and the same is evident from wound certificate issued by Area Hospital, Srikalahasthi, which was marked as Ex.A2. Apart from the same, the petitioner also examined the doctors, who treated him as PWs-2 & 3. A perusal of the evidence of PW-2, it is clear that he did scar excision and local advancement flap to the petitioner on 06.06.2012 and he was discharged on 09.06.2012. To substantiate the same, petitioner also filed copies of medical bills marked as Ex.A4. Further, Dr.D.V.Sunanda Kumar Reddy was examined as PW-3, who deposed that he conducted surgery to the petitioner on 08.03.2012 for the following injuries: “(i) Abrasion left elbow exposing left ulnar

(ii) Abrasion left wrist with foreign body (iii) Abrasion right shoulder bone deep (iv) Abrasion both sides of chests (v) abrasion right side to face skip deep.”

12. Though, PWs-2 & 3 were cross examined at length, nothing was elicited to disprove their evidence. Further, copy of driving license of the driver of the offending vehicle marked as Ex.A5, which would show that the driver had valid driving license as on the date of accident and the offending vehicle was covered under insurance policy issued by the 2nd respondent/appellant- insurance company. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the order under challenge does not require interference.

13. For the reasons record above, there are no merits in the present appeal and accordingly the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 02.04.2026 RMD/DR

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR MACMA No.495 of 2019 Date 02.04.2026 U RMD/DR