ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. PUNITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is preferred by the insurance company against the award dated 10.12.2004 made in M.C.O.P No.245 of 2004 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts in a nutshell are as follows: The first respondent/claimant, is the owner of the Maruthi Esteem Car bearing registration No.TN 43-8672. On 11.09.2003 at about 02.30 A.M., the said car was driven by her husband along with his friend Suresh Kumar from Bangalore towards Tirupur in National Highway NH-47. While they were nearing SIPCOT office east to west, an Auto bearing registration No.TN 33-R-3538 came in a rash and negligent manner in the opposite direction and hit the Maruthi Esteem Car. Due to the impact, the Maruthi Esteem Car was completely damaged. Therefore, the claimant claimed a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- as compensation. The said Auto was insured with the appellant insurance company who resisted the claim. On pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:- "1. Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Auto or not? 2. What is the compesation the claimant is entitled to? After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Auto and awarded compensation of Rs.1,04,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim and the details of the same are as under:- Damage to car=Rs. 88,000 /- Transportation=Rs. 1,000/- Loss of value of car=Rs. 10,000/- Mental agony=Rs 5,000/- ------------------ Total= Rs.1,04,000/- ------------------ Aggrieved by that award, the appellant insurance company has filed the present appeal.

(3.) HEARD the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. On the side of the appellant insurance company, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and documents Exs.R1 to R11 were marked. P.W.1 is the husband of the claimant. P.W.2 is one Ashok Kumar, who is the owner of M/s.Priyam Automobiles, Perundurai. Ex.P1 is the First Information Report. Ex.P2 dated 17.09.2003 is the copy of the charge sheet, Ex.P3 is the diagram, Ex.P4 dated 11.09.2003 motor vehicle inspector's report, Ex.P5 dated 11.09.2003 motor vehicle inspector's report, Ex.P6 is the copy of the policy, Ex.P7 is the repair receipt, Ex.P8 dated 16.02.2004 is the advocate notice, Ex.P9 is the acknowledgement card, Ex.P10 is the copy of the driving licence, Ex.P11 is the R.C. Book, Ex.P12 is the company's registration certificate, Ex.P13 is the income-tax card were marked. On the side of the appellant insurance company, R.W.1 one Sampath Kumar who is the Administrative Officer of the insurance company and R.W.2 is one Murugan who is the Surveyor of the insurance company were examined. Ex.R1 is the letter dated 01.09.2003, Ex.R2 is the estimate copy, Ex.R3 is the claim form, Ex.R4 is the survey report, Ex.R5 is the letter and voucher, Ex.R6 is the copy of the letter dated 17.02.2004, Ex.R7 advocate notice dated 16.02.2004, Ex.R8 is the photos and negatives given by the Surveyor, Ex.R9 is the surveyor licence, Ex.R10 is the order copy of I.R.T.N, Ex.R11 is the certificate given by UDG company were marked. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the Auto and awarded compensation. It is a question of fact. The finding is based on valid materials and evidence and therefore, the same is confirmed.