Andhra Pradesh High Court: Private Investigation By Insurance Company Does Not Outweigh Authenticity Attached To Record Placed By Police
The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld MACT’s decision to jointly hold the offending vehicle and the insurance company liable to pay the motor accident compensation.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that private investigation done by an insurance company through its own employees or a paid agency does not overweigh the authenticity attached to the record placed by the police.
The Court upheld the decision of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) which made the owner of the offending vehicle and the insurance company liable to pay the motor accident compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased. The Bench questioned the authenticity attached to the report of the investigator appointed by the insurance company, which had challeneged the Award by MACT.
A Single Bench of Justice A Hari Haranadha Sarma held, “When the reliability on investigators report in comparison to the official record of police investigation is examined, presumption as to genuineness will weigh more in favour of the police investigation report. The private investigation got done by the Insurance Company through its own either employee or paid agency does not overweigh the authenticity attached to the record placed by the investigating agency,..Therefore, the objection of the insurance company is ignored and the findings of the learned MACT on the points relating to the death of deceased due to accident, involvement of offending vehicle, negligence of its driver are accepted as a proper.”
Advocate D Kodandarami Reddy appeared for the Appellant, while Advocate A Jayanthi represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Appeal, filed by the insurance company, challenged the liability and quantum of compensation awarded by the MACT invoking Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act).
The original claim Petition was filed by the wife, children, and mother of the deceased under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. The MACT, accepting the negligence of the offending vehicle, awarded compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased.. The insurance company contested the finding of negligence and the quantum of compensation, arguing that the accident details were inconsistent and that the deceased’s income was not proven with tax records.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court held, “The reasoning adopted by the learned MACT for ignoring the objection of the Insurance Company…is fit to be confirmed and concurred.”
The Court explained that police investigation reports “overweighs” private investigator reports filed by the insurance company.
“It is relevant to note that the insurance company relied on its investigators report Ex.B2 but atleast said investigator is not examined. What is the authenticity attached to the report of investigator appointed by the insurance company is a question. When the reliability on investigators report in comparison to the official record of police investigation is examined, presumption as to genuineness will weigh more in favour of the police investigation report,” the Bench remarked.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal but modified the Award.
Cause Title: National Insurance Company Limited v. Chavva Rathnamma & Ors. (MACMA/2242/2016)
