AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The first respondent herein was on world tour along with his wife and eight year old daughter. On 14-10-1998 the third respondent, the driver of the lorry bearing No. WB41/8048 owned by the second respondent insured with the appellant company drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit the vehicle of the respondent No.l causing extensive damage. The Magistrate in whose jurisdiction the accident took place simply let off the driver by imposing a fine of Rs.300/-. On a complaint made by the first respondent to the District Collector and the Superintendent of Police except giving shelter for a few days they did not move in the matter, with the result the couple was stranded on the open road under a tree for several days and the troubles the family has undergone is widely reported in the press by publishing the photographs of the couple. Even then, none of the authorities have come to the rescue of this couple. Ultimately they seemed to have filed OP No.626 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srikakulam. But as the owner of the vehicle and the driver were evading notices, there was no progress in the case. In the meantime, one Vemulapalli Srikrishna filed Writ Petition No.36025 of !998 on the file of this Court seeking suitable direction to the Tribunal as well as the Governmental Authorities to help the foreign national who has exhausted all the monies brought along with him. But, this Court by order dated 28-1-1999 directed the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal to dispose of the OP No.626 of 1998 within three months if necessary by issuing substituted summons to the respondents therein who are evading notices. It is also interesting to note that during the pendency of the OP No.626 of 1998 the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal tried to settle the matter through Lok Adalat. Both the Counsel gave different versions for not settling the disputes in Lok Adalat. Added to the misery of the respondent No.l, he being a Russian national he does not know any of the languages including English that arc spoken in this country and with the result he is not able to communicate even with local officials or in the Court properly. Ultimately on 1-2-1999 when the matter came up before the Tribunal, as the first respondent and his family members are practically starving for food the learned Judge directed the appellant to pay Rs.75,000/- as an interim measure and this order seemed to have been passed u/s 140 of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which deals with payment of compensation on the basis of no-fault-liability in the case of death or disablement in accordance with the provisions of the Section. The Manager of the Company the appellant herein while assuring the Court that they will deposit the amount got this appeal filed and obtained an ex parts stay order under which the appellant company was directed to pay another amount of Rs.25,000/- within four weeks.
Mr. Ma Hikarjuna Sharma learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent contended that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case where a foreign national was involved and at the time when the Insurance Company or the District Officials are not coming to his rescue the Court is justified in passing interim relief and as the Court can pass an award either u/s 140 or Section 166 of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Act the Court has chosen to pass an order u/s 140 of the Act as notices on the respondents were not served. It is also his case that while passing a Legislation the Parliament cannot visualise various situations that will be cropped up in the implementation of the provisions of the Act. It is not uncommon that the Act undergoes amendment from time to time to meet the exigencies. In fact, the very procedure for awarding compensation underwent several changes in the last five decades. As no foreign national was ever involved in a case of this type, the Legislature might not have provided for grant of interim relief as in the case of a civil Court. But the Tribunal being judicial forum moreso vested with the powers of a civil Court for certain purposes has to exercise inherent powers to deliver effective justice not only in accordance with law but also with good conscience. In fact the Insurance Company cannot deny its liability to get the vehicle involved in the accident repaired. The car owned by the first respondent being a Russian make it is doubtful whether any spare parts can be purchased locally and whether the vehicle can be used for his onward journey or it has to be condemned. All these aspects have to be taken into consideration while granting award. The provisions of the Act also provides payment of compensation for mental agony undergone by the person involved in the accident. Mr. Sharma brought to my notice that the OP 626 of 1998 was filed for Rs.2,50,000/- by a local advocate who cannot communicate with his client properly as per his estimate.
If all these aspects are taken into consideration the compensation claimed may be on the lower side and it is not the case of the Insurance Company that its liability would not exceed more than Rs.50,000/-. Admittedly the lorry has been insured with the Insurance Company. Though the owner of the lorry and driver were made as party respondents they are only nominal parties to the proceedings and as the Insurance Company entered into their shoes and it has to pay the amount of losses incurred by the owner of the vehicle in case his vehicle involves in any accident.
For all these reasons I feel that the conduct of the Manager of the appellant company herein who filed this appeal knowing fully well the pitiable circumstances under which the foreign national was stranded in the country for four months and obtaining stay order is most reprehensible and deserves to condemned.
Accordingly the civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed with costs. The interim order granted is vacated and the Insurance Company is directed to pay the amount byway of demand draft by Monday i.e., 15-2-1999 to the respondent No.1 who is staying in Hyderabad itself now. The Counsel for the Company shall produce the demand draft in the Court on 15-2-1999 at 10.30a.m. If the Counsel is not in the station the Manager of the Company himself or some other person authorised shall produce the demand draft in the Court. The advocate fee is fixed at Rs. 1,0007- (one thousand rupees).
Post the appeal on 15-2-1999 for "For Being Mentioned"
For Being Mentioned
CMA No.211 of 1999
The appellant-Company handed over a draft of Rs.50,000/- in the presence of the Court to the respondent No. 1-Motor Alexy. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srikakulam, shall also pay him the amount deposited by the appellant-Company before filing this CMA No.211 of 1999. As the claimant wants to pursue the OP, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal shall take immediate steps for service of notices to the owner of the vehicle and the driver of the vehicle by substituted service and thereafter take up the OP for trial on day to day basis and dispose of the same within one month after commencement of the trial. If the 1st respondents wants to bring any amendment to the claim petition he may do so before service of notice on the other respondents.
With the above directions the CMA is closed.