Madras High Court
Oriental Insurance Co. vs S.Kumar on 17 April, 2021
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED 17.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A(MD)No.1743 of 2010
and
M.P(MD)No.3 of 2010
Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd.,
By its Branch Manager,
73/B1 Salai Road,
Lakshmi Complex,
Thillai Nagar,
Trichy – 18.
.. Appellant
vs.
1.S.Kumar,
2.V.Subiramani
...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act 1988 against the award dated 23.12.2009 made in MCOP
No.1943 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III
Additional Sub-Court, Trichy.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
For Appellant : Mr.K.Bhaskaran
For Respondent : No appearance for R2
R-1 Dismissed
JUDGMENT
The appellant is questioning the award passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub-Court, Trichy made in
MCOP No.1943 of 2005 in this appeal.
2.The first respondent filed a claim petition for compensation of
Rs.2,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred
on 10.01.2005. It is his case that on the said date on 10.45 a.m, when he
was standing near Maruthi Hospital, which is situated along Trichy-
Thennur main road, a car owned by the first respondent bearing
registration No.TN-45-K-5493 insured with the appellant, hit against
him. He further stated that he was 52 years old at the relevant point of
time and he was earning Rs.5,000/- per month by doing business. Since
the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the car, he is
entitled to receive compensation from the owner as well as insurer of the
vehicle.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
3.The age, income and liability of the insurer was disputed in the
counter filed before the Tribunal.
4.The claimant gave evidence as P.W.1 and spoken about the
manner of accident in his evidence. Ex.P.1-First Information Report,
Ex.P.2-Wound Certificate and Ex.P.7-Judgment of the Criminal Court
were marked to corroborate the evidence of P.W.1. Though the appellant
disputed the manner of the accident, but they did not choose to examine
the driver of the car. It is to be noted that the driver of the car has
pleaded guilty and paid fine amount. So, the finding of the Tribunal that
the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the car does
not warrant any interference by this Court.
5.Insofar as the quantum is concerned, the claimant suffered 41%
disability, which is evident from the evidence of P.W.2 and Ex.P.4, but
the Tribunal has taken disability as 39% and awarded Rs.39,000/- by
applying Rs.1000/- per one percentage. In addition, Rs.10,000/- for pain
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
and suffering; Rs.5,000/- for nutrition; Rs.5,000/- for transportation; Rs.
24,275/- for medical expenses as per Ex.P.6 has been awarded by the
Tribunal. Since this award has been passed based on the evidence, all are
reasonable. I find no reason to interfere with the award passed by the
Tribunal.
6.It is opposite to mention herein that the driver of the offending
vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving licence at the time of
accident. So, the Tribunal, taking note of the fact that the claimant is the
third party, directed the appellant to satisfy the award amount first and
thereafter, recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. The said
finding is also confirmed and it can be executed by following the case of
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Nanjappan and others [(2004) 13 SCC
224].
7.In such view of the matter, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal fails
and the same is dismissed, as devoid of merits. The appellant Insurance
Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On
such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount,
less the amount already withdrawn, if any, together with proportionate
interest and costs. The appellant shall recover the amount from the
owner of the vehicle after paying compensation to the claimant. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
17.04.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
skn
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
III Additional Sub-Court, Trichy.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA(MD)No.1743 of 2010
K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J
skn
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A(MD)No.1743 of 2010
and
M.P(MD)No.3 of 2010
17.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
