w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



United India Insurance Company Limited v/s Yechuri Nirmala & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93090TN1938GOI000108

Company & Directors' Information:- J B UNITED PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93000MH2014PTC258844

Company & Directors' Information:- J B UNITED PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2014PTC258844

Company & Directors' Information:- UNITED CORPORATION LIMITED [Liquidated] CIN = U99999TN1942PLC003159

Company & Directors' Information:- NIRMALA CORPORATION [Dissolved] CIN = U99999MH1948PLC006174

    M.A.C.M.A. No.1991 of 2006

    Decided On, 03 March 2020

    At, High Court of for the State of Telangana

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

    For the Petitioner: V. Sambasiva Rao, Advocate. For the Respondents: Chandrasekhar Reddy, Gopireddy, Advocates.



Judgment Text


1. Feeling aggrieved by the order and decree dated 31.05.2006 in O.P. No.741 of 2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - cum - II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet (for short 'the Tribunal'), the appellant - Insurer - M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited preferred the present appeal challenging the liability as well as quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

2. Vide the aforesaid order, the Tribunal has awarded the entire claim amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only) as compensation with proportionate costs and interest at 9% per annum thereon from the date of petition till the date of realization, directing the sole respondent - Insurer to deposit the compensation amount.

3. Heard Mr. V. Sambasiva Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Chandrasekhar Reddy Gopireddy, learned counsel for respondents.

4. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that on 10.02.2002 at about 8.30 a.m., deceased - Yechuri Veeranjaneyulu along with one Panubothu Seetharam Naik was proceeding on his Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle bearing registration No.AP 24G 6161 towards Adavidevulapally village from Miryalaguda. At about 8.45 a.m., when they reached Hanumanpet bypass road, one vehicle was coming in opposite direction and at the same time, one road side dog suddenly came on the road. The deceased who was driving the motorcycle suddenly applied brakes, lost control and fell on the ground. As a result, the deceased received grievous injuries on his head. Immediately, he was taken to Government Hospital, Miryalaguda. As the condition was very serious, he was referred to Hyderabad and died on the way.

5. By referring the said facts supported by Exs.A1 - FIR and A6 - final report and also the evidence of PW.1, the learned counsel for the appellant - Insurer would contend that the deceased died due to his own negligence and, therefore, the respondents - claimants being legal representatives of the deceased cannot invoke the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). He would further contend that the deceased was not a third party as per the provisions of the Act and the respondents are not entitled for the compensation. He would also contend that the Tribunal without appreciating the contention of the appellant that the deceased was not a third party and that the claimants are not entitled for compensation, has awarded the entire amount claimed by them fixing liability on the respondent - Insurer.

6. In support of above contentions, the learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd., v. Sadanad Mukhi 2009 ACJ 998 , Dhanraj v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 2005 ACJ 1 and United India Insurance Co.Ltd., v. Sunanda 2007 ACJ 1715 and would contend that in all the said decisions, the deceased died or person injured in the accident due to his own fault and that the legal heirs/injured are not entitled for compensation under the provisions of the Act.

7. The learned counsel for the Insurer would also contend that as per Ex.B1 insurance policy, there is no coverage to the risk of owner/driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. The learned counsel also referred the deposition of RW.1, who categorically deposed that as per Ex.B1, there is no coverage to the owner and as such, Insurer is not liable to pay any compensation to them. According to him, the respondents - claimants did not elicit anything contra from the cross-examination of RW.1. But, the Tribunal without appreciating the same held that as per Ex.B1 insurance policy, it is very clear that it covers risk to the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. According to him, the said finding of the Tribunal is erroneous and contrary to the record since Ex.B1 policy did not cover the risk to the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle. The appellant did not collect any amount towards the same from the deceased and Ex.B1 also shows that the deceased did not pay any amount towards risk to the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle.

8. Supporting the impugned order, the learned counsel for the respondents - claimants would contend that the deceased went to the appellant office to obtain policy and he has offered payment towards risk to the owner - cum - driver. The appellant did not collect the same from the deceased. The learned counsel for the respondents would also contend that the deceased being layman insofar as the insurance policy and terms are concerned and, therefore, it is the duty and responsibility of the appellant - Insurer to advise the deceased properly and collect the premium from the deceased.

9. The learned counsel for the respondents referred various provisions of the India Motor Tariff including Personal Accident Cover under Motor Policy, Compulsory Personal Accident Cover for Owner-Driver, Optional Personal Accident Cover for persons other than Owner-Driver and cover note. He would further refer the certificate of insurance and policy are to be issued only in the standard forms given in Section 6 of the India Motor Tariff. He would also refer to 'extra benefits' mentioned in the said India Motor Tariff. The learned counsel for the respondents would also refer to the standard form for private car package policy and personal accident to unnamed hirer and unnamed pillion passengers. The learned counsel for the respondents has also referred a Circular No.MOT/GEN/10, dated 02.06.1986 issued by the Tariff Advisory Committee, Bombay and would contend that in the meeting of the said Committee, it was decided that the Standard Motor Cycle Comprehensive Policy should cover liability to pillion passengers treating them as occupants in the Motor Cycle and Provide indemnity to such persons who are not carried for hire or reward.

10. With the above said contentions, the learned counsel for the respondents would contend that it is the mistake of the appellant - Insurer in not collecting the premium from the deceased covering risk of owner-driver as per the said India Motor Tariff which is mandatory and, therefore, the respondents being legal heirs of the deceased shall not be deprived of compensation for no fault on them. He would further contend that M.V. Act is a beneficial legislation and, therefore, benefits should be given to the victims/respondents, legal heirs of the deceased. With the said contentions, the learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the Tribunal on the analysis of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, has rightly awarded the compensation fixing liability on the Insurer.

11. On perusal of entire evidence, including Ex.B1 - policy, it is not in dispute that the owner of the offending vehicle did not pay premium to cover the risk of owner-cum-driver to the appellant - Insurer and Insurer did not collect the same. According to the claimants, the Insurer did not collect the same in accordance with the said India Motor Tariff and Circular dated 02.06.1986. But, the claimants cannot raise the said contentions in any application filed under section 166of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. If at all, the claimants are having any grievance, they have to approach appropriate forum, but not under the provisions of M.V. Act. Therefore, the said contention of the claimants cannot be accepted. It is relevant to note that the claimants filed the application under Section 166 of the M.V. Act and, therefore, the burden lies on them to prove that the Insurer is liable to pay compensation. But, the claimants failed to discharge the said burden with convincing evidence.

12. On perusal of the entire record, it is not in dispute that the accident had occurred due to apply of brakes by the deceased who was driving his own motorcycle and lost control over it and fell on the road. There is no third party involved in the accident. The accident had occurred due to own fault of the deceased himself. Therefore, in the case on hand, the deceased is not a third party as per the provisions of the Act. Thus, the respondents - claimants cannot take shelter under the Act by invoking the provisions there-under. As held by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decisions, respondents are not entitled for any compensation and the appellant - Insurer is not liable to pay the said compensation to the claimants. The finding of the Tribunal that as per Ex.B1 policy, it is very clear that it covers risk to the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle involved in the accident and the deceased and, therefore, the Insurer is liable to pay compensation is erroneous and incorrect appreciation on facts and in law. From the said finding, it is clear that the accident had occurred due to apply of sudden brakes by the deceased himself and there is no third party involved.

13. As discussed supra, on perusal of the insurance policy, the appellant did not collect any premium from the deceased to cover the risk to the driver-owner and the deceased did not pay any premium under Ex.B1 to cover risk to the driver-owner. RW.1 evidence is also very specific on the same. The respondents did not elicit anything con

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

tra from cross-examination of RW.1. The appellant has also taken a specific plea that as per Ex.B1 - policy, the respondents are not entitled for any compensation from the Insurer. 14. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the finding of the Tribunal that Ex.B1 covers risk to the driver-owner of the vehicle involved in the accident is erroneous and contrary to the record. As such, applying the principle held by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decisions and also on the analysis of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the finding of the Tribunal fixing the liability on the appellant - Insurer is erroneous and accordingly, the same is liable to be set aside. 15. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant - respondent - Insurer is allowed setting aside the order and decree dated 31.05.2006 in O.P. No.741 of 2004 passed by the Tribunal. However, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in the appeal shall stand closed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

06-10-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rasipuram & Others Versus Arukkani & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-10-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited, Udumalpet Versus N. Thangavel, & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-10-2020 The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vellore Versus M. Suresh & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-10-2020 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Kumbakonam, Represented by its Branch manager, Kumbakonam Versus Nirmala & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-09-2020 M/s. Shankar Jewels & Others Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-09-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Kumbakonam Versus Natarajan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-09-2020 Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan Versus Nirmala Devi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-09-2020 Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Namakkal Versus Shanmugam & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-09-2020 Elite International Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-09-2020 Bhilai Engineering Corporation Ltd., Through Madhavdas K., Authorised Signatory Bec Nandinin Road Industrial Area, Chhattisgarh Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. Through Senior Divisional Manager, Chhattisgarh National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-09-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd., Through The Regional Manager, New Delhi Versus Dinesh Vijay National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-09-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd., Represented by its Branch Manager, Vellore Versus Krishnaveni & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-09-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd., Rajasthan Versus M/s. Radhika Oil Industries, Rajasthan National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-09-2020 Pyar Singh Versus Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
08-09-2020 The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chidambaram Versus Emili & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-09-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Through its Divisional Manager, Osmanpura, Aurangabad Versus Chandrakala & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
03-09-2020 M/s.United India Insurance Company Ltd., Namakkal. Versus Allimuthu @ Sengodan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-09-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. By its Divisional Manager, Arani Versus Raja & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-08-2020 Master Vinay Bharadwaj, Rep. by his Father & Natural Guardian D.R. Shivakumar Versus M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
25-08-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus Maragatham & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-08-2020 United Conveyor Corporation (India) Private Limited Versus Pravash Kumar Mukherjee High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
24-08-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Singhla Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-08-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Narinder Kour & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
14-08-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited, District Raipur & Another Versus Rahi Solanki & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
06-08-2020 M/s. Perfectpac Ltd., Haryana Versus United India Insurance Company Limited (Through Its Divisional Manager/Branch Manager/ Authrised Signatory) & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-08-2020 The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharasthra State, Represented By Its Deputy Manager, Regional Office, Ernakulam Versus Rijawana Jamshed Mulla & Others High Court of Kerala
04-08-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Coimbatore Versus Murugammal & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-07-2020 United India Insurance Co., Ltd., Chennai & Another Versus Suseela Jothi Mary Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-07-2020 United India Insurance Co., Ltd., Chennai & Another Versus Suseela Jothi Mary Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-07-2020 The Divisional Manager, M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Vellore Versus M. Amavasai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-07-2020 The Chairman & Managing Director, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus Rajini & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Md. Khayyumkhan & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
30-06-2020 Bilsy Joseph, now residing at 3743, Falkner Drive, United States of America, Represented by her Power of Attorney holder (Mother), Rosamma Joseph, Kottayam Versus Registrar of Births & Deaths, Changanassery Muncipality, Kottayam & Others High Court of Kerala
25-06-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Amar Singh Raghuwanshi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-06-2020 M/s. Jain Textiles, Ashok Jain Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-06-2020 M.H. Uma Maheshwari & Others Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Supreme Court of India
04-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Chennai Versus N. Prathap & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-06-2020 PUEBLO HOLDINGS LIMITED, Rep. by its authorised signatory Siddhesh Sham Kshirsagar Versus EMIRATES TRADING AGENCY LLC, A company incorporated under the appropriate laws of the United Arab Emirates having its registered office and/or business address at ETA Star House, United Arab Emirates & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-05-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Pune Regional Office, through its Divisional Office & Others Versus Shriniwas Ramayya Kamtam & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
30-04-2020 United Nurses Association, Through Its State President Shoby Joseph, Thrissur Versus Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary, New Delhi & Another High Court of Kerala
15-04-2020 United Nurses Association Through Its President Versus Union of India & Others Supreme Court of India
18-03-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Mora Devi High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
18-03-2020 Dr. Nirmala Devi, Obstetrician & Gynecologist, Assitant Professor Versus Chandrakanta National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-03-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Tiruppur Versus Kaveriammal & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-03-2020 S. Mahadevan Versus The General Manager, (Appellate Authority) Personnel Department, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-03-2020 Agrocel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
11-03-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Div. Office- I, Secunderabad Versus Syed Mohd. Rayees & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
05-03-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus B. Sudha & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 Nirmala Kothari Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
03-03-2020 United Bank of India, West Bengal Versus Ranjan Basu & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
02-03-2020 Geetha & Others Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Neyveli High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-02-2020 Minor Sukhen Biswas (Son) & Others Versus Nirmala Biswas & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-02-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Motor TP Claims Hub, Represented by its Manager Versus T. Thimmanna & Others High Court of Karnataka
20-02-2020 S. Senguttuvel & Others Versus The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co., Ltd., Salem & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-02-2020 Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vellore V/S Rani & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-02-2020 M/s. Baspa Organics Limited V/S United India Insurance Company Limited Supreme Court of India
12-02-2020 The United Goans Foundation, through its Secretary Avinash Tavares Versus The State of Goa through its Chief Secretary, Secretariat & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-02-2020 United Bank of India V/S Ashok Kumar Kalra and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Delhi
10-02-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus C. Meenakshi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-02-2020 Canara Bank Versus M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
06-02-2020 Rakesh Chandra Savita Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Divisional Manager & Another Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
06-02-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Basheerbagh, Hyderabad Versus Syed Rehmath Ali & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
05-02-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Md Nur Mohamed High Court of Gauhati
03-02-2020 Rajesh Narula Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Branch Manager Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
31-01-2020 The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Cuddalore Versus Purushothaman (died) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-01-2020 Shyam Manohar Harit Versus CPIO United India Insurance Company Ltd. Central Information Commission
31-01-2020 The Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chennai Versus C. Kavitha & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-01-2020 The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd, Madurai. Versus Muthammal & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-01-2020 B. Alphonse Legori Versus CPIO /Manager United India Insurance Company Ltd. Central Information Commission
30-01-2020 The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Hosur & Another Versus Vediyappan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by its Deputy General Manager Versus D. Sunderarajan High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-01-2020 United Mine Workers Union Through Shri Puti Gaonkar General Secretary Versus Union of India, Through Secretary, (Ministry of Labour and Employment) & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
25-01-2020 United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Bhilai Engineering Corporation Ltd. Chhatisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Raipur
23-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Gujarat Versus Mukesh Parikh & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Gujarat Versus Mukesh Parikh Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-01-2020 Mukesh Parikh & Another Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Tamil Nadu National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-01-2020 Prashant Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-01-2020 Prashant Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Assistant Manager Authorised Signatory, Maharashtra National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-01-2020 M/s United India Insurance Company Limited, Tadepallygudem Versus V. Narahari Sharma & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
21-01-2020 M/s. BCPL Railway Infrastructure Ltd. Versus The Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
20-01-2020 Shri Gas Service Versus United India Insurance Co. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-01-2020 Amrita Sarkar (Ghosh) & Another Versus United Bank of India & Another Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Agartala
17-01-2020 Sangrur Sales Corporation Versus United India Insurance Company Limited & Another Supreme Court of India
16-01-2020 Nirmala Sirsam Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh
10-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Urmila Agarwal & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-01-2020 Nirmala Gollen Versus Davender Gollen High Court of Punjab and Haryana
09-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Shindutai Wasudeorao Thakare & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
09-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Tila Kumari Giri & Others High Court of Punjab and Haryana
08-01-2020 Sunita Bhalla Versus United Inida Insurance Co Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
08-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Reshma & Others High Court of Delhi
08-01-2020 J. Nirmala Devi & Others Versus The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Vijayawada-Dharmapuri Pipeline project, Rep., by its General Manager, Mumbai & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
07-01-2020 United India Insurance Co Ltd. Versus Sandeep Kumar Bubna Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Mumbai
07-01-2020 United Indian Insurance Company Limited, Through its Branch Manager Versus Ujwala Salgonkar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
07-01-2020 Ramkhiladi & Another Versus The United India Insurance Company & Another Supreme Court of India
07-01-2020 The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Ramanathapuram Versus T. Saravanan & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
07-01-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Gopal Agencies National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
07-01-2020 United India Insurance Co Ltd. Versus Sandeep Kumar Bubna National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-01-2020 Nalini Bala Cold Storage Private Limited and Others. V/S United Bank of India and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Kolkata
03-01-2020 Ajit Singh Versus United India Insurance Company Limited, Haryana & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-12-2019 Global United Shipping India Private Limited, (formerly known as Jalhansa Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.), Represented by its Director, Prem Kumar Menon, Chennai Versus Traffic Manager, Chennai Port Trust, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras