Madras High Court
Rajesh vs M.Rajamani on 27 April, 2021
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
Rajesh ... Appellant
Vs.
1.M.Rajamani
2.Iffco – Tokio General Insurance Company Limited,
No.145/131, Nelson Manickam Road,
Chennai – 600 029. ... Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree order dated
06.07.2017 made in M.C.O.P.No.2111 of 2011, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, the VI Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Subadra
For Respondents : Mr.M.B.Raghavan for
M/s.M.B.Gopalan Associates for R2
Exparte R1
JUDGMENT
The claimant is the appellant in this appeal against the impugned
Judgment and decree dated 06.07.2017 passed by the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, the VI Court of Small Causes, Chennai in
M.C.O.P.No.2111 of 2011.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 1 of 6
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
2.By the impugned Judgment and decree, the claim petition filed
by the appellant was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that the
claimant who was a pillion rider along with the rider who was
intoxigated at the time of accident and hit the motor cycle against the
stationery car which was parked on the side of the road. The Tribunal
has considered Ex.R1 acccident/injury report to come to the above
conlcusion.
3.Challenging the same, the learned counsel for the
appellant/claimant submits that Ex.R1 Accident Register, by itself was
not sufficient to come to a conclusion that the claimant or the rider were
under the influence of the alcohol.
4.Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that
the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal is well-
reasoned and requires no interference. He therefore prays for dismissal
of this appeal.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 2 of 6
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
5.He submits that the fact that the accident has taken place on
account of the bike hiting against a stationery car itself brings out of the
fact that the rider of the motor cycle was under the influence of the
alcohol which is evident from Ex.R1 Accident Register.
6.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent
and also perused the impugned judgment and decree and the Exhibits that
were marked before the Tribunal.
7.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is not governed by strict
rules of evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. These Tribunal
are governed by preponderance of probabilities. The evidence on record
particularly Ex.R1 Accident Register which is the first document
generated after the accident at the time of admission of the injured person
to the hospital indicates that the appellant and the rider of the motor cycle
Ramalingam were under the influenced of alcohol. The fact that they
also hit the stationery vehicle but also seems to indicate that they were
responsible for the accident and therefore they are not entitled to any
compensation. As a pillion rider, the appellant invited the risk upon
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 3 of 6
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
himself in as much as he ought not to have travelled on a motor cycle
which was being driven by the person who was under the influence of the
alcohol by applying, the principles of doctrine of ''Res Ipsa Loquitur and
Volenti Non Fit Injuria''. However, considering the fact there was
accident and injury, I am inclined to dispose this appeal by awarding a
sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation to the appellant for the grevious
injury suffered by the appellant in terms of Section 140 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988.
8.The appeal filed by the appellant thus stands partly allowed in
terms of the above observations. The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company
is therefore directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- together with
interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of numbering of the claim
petition till the date of such deposit, less any amount already deposited
by it, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this Judgment.
9.On such deposit being made by the 2nd respondent/Insurance
Company, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the same
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 4 of 6
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
together with interest accrued thereon, less any amount already
withdrawn in the same proportion as was ordered by the Tribunal.
However, it is noticed that there is a delay in filing the appeal.
Therefore, no interest shall be paid during the period of 437 days in filing
the appeal.
10.Accordingly, this appeal stands partly allowed in terms of above
observations. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petition is closed.
27.04.2021
jas
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
To:
1.Iffco – Tokio General Insurance Company Limited,
No.145/131, Nelson Manickam Road,
Chennai – 600 029.
2.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
VI Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
3.The V.R.Section,
Madras High Court, Madras.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 5 of 6
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
C.SARAVANAN, J.
jas
C.M.A.No.3383 of 2019
27.04.2021
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 6 of 6
