B.N. NAGARAJ, S/O. B. NAGENDRAPPA Vs. THE ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of judgment and award dated 18.6.2009 in MVC.No. 520/2007 on the file of Addl. MACT, Davanagere. The appeal in MFA.No. 8515/2009 is filed by 3rd respondent before Tribunal challenging its liability to pay compensation awarded to claimant on the ground that policy issued by insurance company is a trade policy under Rule 41 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. As such, insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to claimant, who was travelling in a new vehicle, which was being shifted from one place to another, wherein he was travelling along with his cocoon, which is not permissible. So far as MFA.No. 6496/2009 is concerned, it is filed by claimant before Tribunal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded to him in the aforesaid proceedings.

(2.) THE admitted facts are that lorry bearing registration No.KA -01/TC -75 is belonging to 2nd respondent. Admittedly, said vehicle was a new vehicle, which was under transit from the premises of manufacturer to that of dealer. At the relevant time, said lorry was covered with trade policy issued by 3rd respondent to 2nd respondent and was driven by 1st respondent before Tribunal. It is further not in dispute that claimant was travelling in the said lorry along with his goods. On 10.9.2006 at about 7.15 p.m., said lorry dashed against a tractor and trailer on the left side of road in front of BMK Rice Mill on National Highway at Davanagere. In the said accident claimant suffered serious Orthopaedic injuries to his both legs and as well as to other parts of body, which required his hospitalisation for a period of 445 days. During which period, he underwent prolonged treatment for several injuries involving surgery to his legs to insert implants to set right fractured bone and putting him on traction and confining him to bed for more than 1 1/2 to 2 years.

(3.) HEARD the appellant's counsel in both appeals and contesting respondent. In this proceedings also owner and driver of lorry have remained exparte. The contest is only between insurer and claimant. Perused the grounds of appeal in first of the appeals in MFA.No. 8515/2009, the material on record and Rule 41 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.