The Divisional Manager vs Dharmaraj Alias N.P. Dharmarajan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9350 Mad

                                                                              C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 09.04.2021

                                                     CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                              C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016
                                                       and
                                               CMP No.9956 of 2016

                     1. The Divisional Manager,
                     The National Insurance Company Ltd.,
                     Door No.10, Plot No.101-106,
                     No.1, B.M.C. House,
                     Cannaught Palace,
                     New Delhi.

                     2. The Branch Manager,
                     National Insurance Company Limited,
                     No.7, Raja Street,
                     Veerapandi Village,
                     Gobi Taluk,
                     Erode District.                                   ....   Appellants
                                                  versus

                     1. Dharmaraj alias N.P. Dharmarajan
                     2. G. Thangaraj
                     3. Soundarajan                                    ….     Respondents


                           Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                     Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and decree passed by the M.A.
                     C.T.O.P. No.97 of 2011, dated 25.04.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident
                     Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Gobichettypalayam.

                     1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                   C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016



                     For Appellants                      :     Ms.N.B.Surekha
                     For Respondents                     :     Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel for R1
                                                               R2 and R3 – Exparte.

                                                        JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the

award dated 25.04.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Subordinate Court, Gobichettypalayam in MACT OP No.97 of 2011.

2. The appellant has challenged the award on the following grounds :

a) The Tribunal has erroneously adopted the multiplier method for fixing the compensation and

b) The Tribunal has failed to take note of the fact that three persons travelled in the motor cycle which dashed against the insured car.

3. Heard Ms.N.B.Surekha, learned counsel for the appellant and

Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel, learned counsel for the 1st respondent. R2 and R3

were set ex-parte before the Tribunal, hence notice to R2 and R3 are

dispensed with.

4. This Court has perused and examined the impugned award.

5. The first respondent / claimant sustained a fracture in the right leg

and a plate was fixed during the time of surgery, performed on him. He was

a Painter and the Tribunal after giving due consideration to the evidence

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016

available on record has observed that he suffered loss of income due to the

injuries sustained by him. The Doctor has assessed the disability of the

claimant at 36% and based on the same and also in view of the fact that the

claimant has suffered loss of income, the Tribunal has adopted the

multiplier method for fixing the compensation. This Court does not find

any infirmity in the same as no contra evidence has been produced by the

appellant / Insurance Company before the Tribunal to disprove the

contentions of the claimant with regard to the nature of injuries as well as

his loss of income.

6. With regard to the 2nd contention raised by the appellant is

concerned, the same is also unsustainable since, no evidence has been

produced by the appellant / Insurance Company before the Tribunal. The

Driver of the insured car was also not examined as a witness before the

Tribunal by the appellant / Insurance Company. Therefore, this Court is of

the considered view that the appellant / Insurance Company is liable to pay

the compensation to the1st respondent / claimant.

7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016

this appeal and accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand

dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

8. The Appellant / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire

award amount awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 7.5% p.a.

from the date of claim petition till the date of realization, less the amount, if

any, already deposited to the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P. No.97 of 2011, dated

25.04.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate

Court, Gobichettypalayam, within a period of four weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the

Tribunal is directed to transfer the award amount directly to the bank

account of the 1st respondent / claimant through RTGS, within a period of

two weeks thereafter.

09.04.2021

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking / Non speaking vsi2

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016

vsi2

To :

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Gobichettypalayam.

2. The Section Officer, V.R. section, High Court, Madras - 104.

C.M.A. No.1298 of 2016

09.04.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/