Madras High Court
Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs S.Chinnaiah on 22 December, 2021
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated: 22.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Represented by its Divisional Manager,
No.16, North Veli Street,
Madurai-1. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.S.Chinnaiah
2.K.Mani
3.Murugan
4.M/s.Royal Sundaram Allianz
General Insurance Company Ltd
Represented by its General Manager,
Madurai. ... Respondents
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 16.09.2011 made in
MCOP.No.642 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, III Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran
For R1 : Mr.M.P.Senthil
For R2 to R4 : No Appearance
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
JUDGMENT
The appellant filed this appeal against the award dated
16.09.2011 made in MCOP.No.642 of 2006 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.
2.The facts of the case are that on 24.12.2005, when the first
respondent/claimant travelling as pillion rider in second
respondent/first respondent's two wheeler, the driver of two wheeler
drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the
parked vehicle. The third respondent's two wheeler also came behind
the vehicle of the second respondent/first respondent and dashed the
vehicle of the second respondent/first respondent. Due to the same,
the first respondent/claimant sustained multiple injuries. Therefore,
the first respondent/claimant filed MCOP.No.642 of 2006 seeking
compensation. After considering the submissions and evidences on
record, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.1,78,088/- with
7.5% interest.
3.The appellant/Insurance Company has filed the present appeal
to set aside the award passed in MCOP.No.642 of 2006 on the ground
that the vehicle of the third respondent is also responsible for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
accident. Therefore, the fourth respondent/Insurance Company is
also liable to pay compensation.
4.It is seen from the First Information Report and the evidence
of PW.1 that the claimant sustained injuries only due to the rash and
negligent driving of the third respondent and it is clear that the third
respondent is also liable for the accident. Hence, both the appellant
and the fourth respondent are responsible to pay compensation
awarded by the Tribunal. 50% contributory negligent fixed on both
the appellant and the fourth respondent.
5.In the result, this civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed with a
direction to the appellant and the fourth respondent to pay 50% of the
compensation each with 7.5% interest within six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs.
22.12.2021
Index :yes/No
Internet:yes/No
gns
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic,
a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct
copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
S.ANANTHI,J
gns
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
III Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.
CMA.(MD)No.1106 of 2013
22.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
