Tribunal raps insurer for hiding key document, fines for delay
SYED BASHARAT
SRINAGAR, Mar 17: More than fourteen years after a devastating bus accident near Sumbal left several passengers seriously injured, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Srinagar has directed United India Insurance Company Ltd. to pay over ₹1.13 crore in compensation to four victims, while also reprimanding the insurer’s counsel for filing lengthy legal pleadings instead of presenting clear and concise facts before the court.
In a detailed judgment spanning over 130 pages, the tribunal presided over by District and Sessions Judge Fayaz Ahmad Qureshi held the insurer liable to compensate the injured passengers of a Tata bus that plunged into a deep gorge on January 10, 2012 near Wayil in Sumbal area of Bandipora district. The tribunal concluded that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, resulting in grievous injuries to multiple passengers, some of whom suffered permanent disabilities.
The claim petitions had been filed by Mushtaq Ahmad Dar, Raja Begum, Rafiqa Begum and Parvaiz Ahmad Ganai, who were among the passengers travelling in the ill-fated bus when it lost control and fell nearly 50 feet down a gorge. Evidence placed before the tribunal revealed that many passengers sustained serious injuries in the crash and were immediately shifted to hospital for treatment, with some requiring long-term medical care due to the severity of their injuries.
During the proceedings, the tribunal examined witness testimonies, police investigation records and medical documents to determine the circumstances surrounding the accident. The police investigation had already resulted in the filing of a charge-sheet against the driver for rash and negligent driving, and the tribunal observed that the material placed on record clearly established that the accident occurred because the driver failed to control the vehicle while negotiating the road stretch.
One of the most contentious aspects of the case was the attempt by United India Insurance Company Ltd. to avoid liability for the accident. The insurer argued that the offending vehicle was not insured at the time the accident occurred and claimed that the insurance policy had been issued only later on the same day.
According to the insurance company, the accident had taken place around 10 a.m. on January 10, 2012, while the insurance cover note and policy were issued later in the afternoon at about 3:14 p.m. The insurer alleged that the vehicle owner had concealed the occurrence of the accident and approached the company afterwards to obtain insurance coverage. On this basis, the insurer contended that the risk under the policy commenced only from the time mentioned in the cover note and that it could therefore not be saddled with liability for an accident that had already taken place earlier that day.
However, the tribunal carefully evaluated the evidence relating to the insurance transaction, including testimonies regarding the inspection of the vehicle and the payment of the premium. The tribunal noted that the owner had approached the insurance office for renewal of the policy after the earlier cover had expired and that the vehicle had been inspected by an agent of the company in connection with the insurance process.
The tribunal also took into account the practical circumstances surrounding the accident, noting that the bus had been severely damaged in the crash and remained in police custody after being pulled out of the gorge. In view of these circumstances, the tribunal found the insurer’s claim that the vehicle had been insured only after the accident to be unconvincing and unsupported by credible evidence.
Rejecting the defence raised by the insurer, the tribunal held that the vehicle stood insured and that United India Insurance Company Ltd., as the indemnifier under the policy, was legally bound to satisfy the compensation claims of the victims.
While dealing with the written statement filed by the insurance company, the tribunal also expressed strong displeasure over the manner in which the pleadings had been drafted by the insurer’s counsel. The court observed that instead of presenting a clear and factual defence, the written statement resembled an “academic book,” containing lengthy excerpts from judicial precedents and elaborate legal discussions that were not directly relevant to the facts of the case.
The tribunal emphasized that pleadings before a court must focus on material facts and concise assertions rather than reproducing long passages from legal judgments. Such an approach, the court noted, unnecessarily complicates proceedings and fails to assist the tribunal in adjudicating the dispute efficiently.
After examining the injuries, medical expenses, treatment records and the long-term impact of the accident on the lives of the victims, the tribunal determined the compensation payable in each of the four petitions.
Mushtaq Ahmad Dar was awarded ₹1 lakh, Raja Begum ₹15.04 lakh, Rafiqa Begum ₹92.83 lakh and Parvaiz Ahmad Ganai ₹4.34 lakh. The total compensation awarded by the tribunal thus amounted to ₹1,13,21,400.
The tribunal further directed United India Insurance Company Ltd. to deposit the entire compensation amount within 30 days. The court also ordered that the awarded amount would carry interest at the rate of eight percent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petitions until realization.
The tribunal cautioned that if the insurer fails to deposit the compensation within the stipulated period of 30 days, the outstanding amount will attract a higher interest rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of default.
The tribunal also imposed litigation costs amounting to ₹50,000 on the insurance company.
Reiterating the fundamental objective of the Motor Vehicles Act, the tribunal observed that its duty is to ensure that victims of road accidents receive “just compensation.” The law, the tribunal noted, mandates that courts must assess compensation in a manner that fairly reflects the suffering, medical expenses and financial losses endured by accident victims.
With this award, the tribunal brought to a close a prolonged legal battle arising out of the 2012 accident, providing long-awaited financial relief to the injured passengers who had been pursuing their claims for more than a decade.
