Motor Accident Claim - High Court Can Enhance Compensation Even In Absence Of Appeal Or Cross-Objection By Claimants: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has said that in the exercise of the appellate powers, it can enhance the amount of compensation even in the absence of appeal or cross-objection by the claimants in the motor accident cases.

"If on the face of the award or even in the light of the evidence on record, and keeping in view the settled legal position regarding the claimants being entitled to just compensation and it also being the statutory duty of the Court/Tribunal to award just compensation, this Court in the exercise of the appellate powers can enhance the amount of compensation even in the absence of appeal or cross-objection by the claimants," said the bench.

The court also said that for doing justice and to award just compensation, the provisions of Order 41 Rule 33 are to be invoked. "...We find that there is no legal interdict or a prohibition under law, rather the mandate of law is to award just compensation. There is also no prejudice being caused to a person not a party before the Court. The appellant has been heard on the point of just compensation," it added.

The division bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Dr. K. Manmadha Rao was hearing an appeal filed by the insurance company challenging the award passed by the tribunal.  It made the observations after the claimants argued that they are entitled for the enhancement of the amount under the head of loss of consortium as also the interest @ 9% on the amount awarded. The argument was countered by the insurance company, saying that in the absence of any appeal by the claimants or cross-objection, the amount as awarded by the Tribunal cannot be enhanced.

In 2009, an accident had occurred between a car and a Gas Tanker lorry, which caused the death of the driver and a passenger in the car. The tribunal in 2013 concluded that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver and thereby directed the National Insurance Company to pay compensation on behalf of the Lorry driver to the claimants.

The National Insurance Company challenged this award before the High Court contending that the accident had occurred due to negligence on part of the driver of the car.

The court after considering the facts and evidence placed before it came to the conclusion that there was no contributory negligence on part of the driver of the car and the sole testimony of the driver of the lorry tanker could not be considered for accepting the plea of contributory negligence.

It further said that there were two eye-witnesses to the accident, and both of them narrated the same story that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving on part of the lorry driver.

The court enhanced the compensation from Rs 21,11,024 to Rs.25,37,816. 

Counsel for Appellant: N. Rama Krishna

Counsel for Respondent: S.V. Muni Reddy

Click Here To Read/Download Order