MOHAMMAD ALI Vs. MOHD. NOOR
LAWS(RAJ)-1984-9-35
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on September 06,1984

MOHAMMAD ALI Appellant
VERSUS
Mohd. Noor Respondents

JUDGEMENT

G.M. Lodha, J. - (1.)NO one appears to oppose this appeal. The facts giving rise to this matter are that the claimant Respondent had preferred a Motor Accident Claim Petition under Section 110 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Tonk wherein, the claimant had alleged that on 27.11.1977 at about 9 p.m., when he was going on his cycle from Bara Kuwa to Tal Kotora, the Appellant while driving his motor cycle rashly and negligently and at a brisk speed came from the opposite side and collided with the cyclist. As a result of which the cyclist sustained injuries and fracture in his hand.
(2.)THE claimant had alleged in his petition that he was earning Rs. 600/ - . He claimed compensation from the Appellant as well as the insurer of the motor cycle. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs. 4,250.00 as compensation to the claimant Respondent No. 1. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid award Appellant has preferred this appeal.
The only point argued by Mr. Srivastava is that the insurance policy now produced in this Court along with application under Order 41 Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure clearly shows that on the date of the accident this vehicle was insured with the company. By mistake in the trial court the policy letter was not filed as the vehicle was hypothecated with the bank. On a consideration of the application dated 21.10.1980 supported by the affidavit and against which no reply has been filed and objection raised by the Respondent, I am of the opinion that the prayer should be accepted. This policy of insurance commenced from 28.4.77 to 27.4.78 and therefore, on the date of the accident i.e. 27.11.1977 the vehicle was duly insured.

(3.)CONSEQUENTLY , this appeal is accepted and it is held that the United India Insurance Company Ltd., Respondent No. 2 would also be liable for above amount. There would be no order as to cost. Mr. Srivastava submits that the amount has been paid to the claimant and therefore, Respondent No. 2, United India Insurance Company Ltd., shall indemnify the Appellant by payment of the above amount. This prayer is accepted.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.