UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. R NARAYANA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. filed this civil miscellaneous appeal against the judgment and decree in O.P. No. 659 of 1992 dated 7.7.1995 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Nizamabad. The respondent No. 1 is the claimant and owner of the tractor bearing No. ATJ 9249 and trailer No. ATJ 9251. The respondent No. 2 is the owner of the lorry bearing No. MP 04-EO886. The respondent No. 1 filed an application O.P. No. 659 of 1992 before the Tribunal for the damage caused to the tractor on account of accident occurred on 16.6.92 with the lorry of the respondent No. 2. The Tribunal held that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the respondent No. 2 in which the respondent No. 1 sustained injuries and also the tractor was damaged. It appears that the respondent No. 1 filed a separate O.P., claiming damages for the personal injuries and certain amounts have been awarded. In addition to the claim for personal injuries, the respondent No. 1 filed O.P. No. 659 of 1992 towards damages caused to the vehicle and the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 27,000 payable by the insurance company, i.e., the appellant and also the respondent No. 2, owner of the lorry.

(2.) Aggrieved by the said order, the insurance company filed the appeal contending that as per section 147 (2) (b) of Motor Vehicles Act the liability of the insurance company in addition to the liability payable for the personal damages shall be only Rs. 6,000 in respect of damages to any property of the third parties. Therefore, the liability of the appellant is limited for an amount of Rs. 6,000 only in respect of damages to the property of the owner of the tractor.

(3.) Accordingly, I modified the order of the Tribunal limiting the liability of the insurance company to pay the compensation towards damages caused to the respondent No.1's tractor to an extent of Rs. 6,000 only alone and the respondent No. 1 is entitled to recover the remaining amount from the respondent No. 2. The order of the Tribunal is accordingly modified. The appeal is allowed as indicated above. No costs. Appeal allowed.