THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. V. SEETHAPATHY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3783 OF 2002 Dated:02.12.2009 Between: The National Insurance Company Limited, Rep., by its Regional Manager, Regional Office, Mogul Courts, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad .. Appellant And Md. Akram Khan and another .. Respondents JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.01.2000 passed in O.P.No.1541 of 1995 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – cum - III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, wherein the claim of the first respondent was allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.82,018/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the petition. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and for the respondents. Perused the records. The first respondent herein filed a claim application seeking compensation of Rs.1,07,311/- towards damage of his vehicle – a tourist bus bearing No.AHT 8570, which met with an accident by dashing against another tourist bus bearing No.AP 7T 2889 between Kalahasthi and Tirupathi on 07.06.1995. It is stated that the claimant’s bus was badly damaged in the accident and inmates of both the vehicles sustained injuries. A case in Crime No.62 of 1995 was registered by the Renigunta Police against the driver of the bus bearing No.AP 7T 2889. The owner of the said offending vehicle remained ex parte. The appellant – insurer filed a counter affidavit opposing the claim and denying his liability to pay compensation and further contended that the claim is highly excessive. During the enquiry, PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A10 were marked on behalf of the claimant. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the appellant – insurer. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing No.AP 7T 2889 by its driver. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.82,018/- towards damage to the said vehicle. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the insurer. Learned counsel for the appellant – insurer would mainly contend that as per the terms and conditions of the policy and also Section 147(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’), the liability of the insurer in respect of third party’s property damage is limited to Rs.6,000/-. A perusal of the policy would show that the liability in respect of third party’s property damage is limited to Rs.6,000/-. Section 147 (2) (b) of the Act is also to the same effect. When that is so, the award passed by the Tribunal fastening the joint liability on the appellant – insurer for the entire amount of Rs.82,018/- is unsustainable. As the Tribunal erred in ignoring the statutory limit imposed on the liability of the appellant – insurer in respect of third party’s property damage and also the terms and conditions of the policy giving effect to the said statutory provision, the appellant – insurer is held liable to reimburse the owner of the vehicle only to the extent of Rs.6,000/- with proportionate interest. The claimant is at liberty to recover the balance amount from the owner of the vehicle. In the result, the appeal is allowed as stated above. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ G. V. SEETHAPATHY, J 02.12.2009 KH