AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Byrareddy, J.—These appeals are considered together as they arise out of the same proceedings. The appeal in MFA. No. 4106/2005 is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and the other appeal is by the insured seeking to assert that the policy of insurance in respect of the vehicle was valid and effective as on the date of accident.
The appellant was a minor, at the time of accident and had suffered a fracture of the lower end of fibula. It was claimed that the appellant was hospitalized for a week, on account of the accident and had incurred substantial expenditure. A claim for compensation having been laid, the owner of the vehicle did not contest the proceedings. The insurer however, contested the same and raised a serious objection as to the alleged date of accident. The insurer contended that the accident did not occur on 27-11-2001 as alleged. The First information report was lodged on 30-11-2001. The medical records disclosed that the appellant was given treatment for the injuries on 28-11-2001, though the accident is said to have occurred on 27-11-2001 at 9-45 a.m. The reason for this seeming discrepancy, according to the insurer is that, the policy of insurance in respect of the vehicle had expired on the midnight of 27-11-2001, as the same was not renewed. If the accident was shown to have occurred on 28-11-2001, the insurer was not liable. It is for this reason that appellant, or his father on his behalf, had struck upon the bright idea of indicating the date of accident as 27-11-2001, though the accident had apparently occurred on 28-11-2001. The police having lent a helping hand in this design, the First information report which was admittedly lodged on 30-11-2001 has conveniently indicated the date of accident as 28-11-2001.
The Tribunal having found that the accident has not occurred on 27-11-2001, has absolved the insurer of any liability under the policy of insurance. However, has held that the offending vehicle was driven in a rash and negligent manner resulting in the accident which may have occurred on 28-11-2001. Having addressed the claim for compensation has held that there was no material produced to establish the several heads of claim. The Tribunal while taking note of the nature of injuries and the treatment that would be necessary in respect of the same had awarded Rs. 15000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 5000/- towards medical and incidental expenditure and Rs. 1000/- towards attendant charges. The claimant seeks to challenge the same and seeks enhancement.
The insured on the other hand seeks to challenge the finding of the Tribunal in holding that the insurer was not liable.
The counsel for the claimant would argue at length in seeking to make out a case for enhancement of compensation. However, it is seen that the Tribunal has arrived at a fair and just amount of compensation, having regard to the nature of injury and the treatment received.
In so far as the appeal by the insured is concerned, the assertion of the insurer is to be accepted, as the sequence of events clearly indicate an attempted manipulation of the true facts and circumstances. Apart from the First Information Report, there is not a single document to indicate that the accident might have occurred on 27-11-2001. On the other hand, the documents available would disclose that the accident has occurred on 28-11-2001. The fact that the policy of insurance had expired on 27-11-2001, would afford the reason for such an attempt at manipulation. The Tribunal has rightly absolved the insurer of any liability.
In the result, there is no merit in these appeals and they stand dismissed. (Sic)