The Branch Manager vs Lakshmi : R1/Petitioner
2021 Latest Caselaw 2842 Mad

                                                         1

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               DATED :08.02.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.KRISHNAVALLI

                                             C.M.A(MD)No.437 of 2017
                                                      and
                                             CMP(MD)No.4695 of 2017

                     The Branch Manager,
                     Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
                     2nd Floor, Sri Vijay Complex,
                     Theni Post, Theni Taluk,
                     Theni District.                   : Appellant/2nd Respondent

                                                       Vs.

                     1.Lakshmi                               : R1/Petitioner
                     2.S.Samydass                            : R2/ 1st Respondent

                           PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under
                     Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act against the award, dated
                     19.03.2013 made in MCOP No.15 of 2012 on the file of Motor
                     Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Theni.


                                    For Appellant        : Mr.C.Ramachandran

                                    For Respondents      : No appearance

                                                    JUDGMENT

Challenge made in this appeal is to the award passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Theni,

in MCOP No.15 of 2012, dated 19.03.2013.

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

2.The brief facts of the case are that on 11.12.2011, the

deceased Ponmaran and his wife Lakshmi went to Cumbum to take

part in the procession in respect of Mullai Periyar dispute at

Cumbum. The deceased and his wife went in the motor cycle

TN-58-H-8142. They were proceeding from K.K Patti to Cumbum.

When the deceased turned to Cumbum Bus Stand road, the driver

of the tractor TN-60-E-0464 along with trailor coming on the back,

drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed on the motor

cycle. Due to it, both of them fell down and the deceased sustained

injuries on the back side of the head and left shoulder and his wife

Lakshmi also sustained injuries on the head and right shoulder.

They were taken taken to Government Hospital, Cumbum, however,

the deceased Pnmaran died in the hospital itself and the claimant

sustained multiple injuries on the right side of the chest, right wrist

and all over the body. The injured claimant filed a claim petition

seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on the ground that the

driver of the tractor was responsible for the accident.

3.The claimant has stated that at the time of the accident, her

age was 48 and she was vegetable vendor and was earning Rs.

3,000/- per month. A criminal case in Crime No.394 of 2011 was

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

registered against the driver of the tractor by Cumbum North

Police.

4.The claim was opposed by the appellant Insurance

Company disputing the manner of accident and their liability to pay

compensation.

5.The Tribunal, upon consideration of oral and documentary

evidence, came to the conclusion that the driver of the tractor was

responsible for the accident and awarded compensation of Rs.

10,000/- together with interest @ 7.5 % p.a. Aggrieved by the

award of the tribunal, the appellant Insurance Company is before

this court.

6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and

perused the materials available on record. There is no

representation on behalf of the respondents.

7.Even though, so many grounds were raised in the grounds

of appeal, it is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the

appellant that the quantum of award is on the higher side, so the

quantum is to be reduced.

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

8.The manner of the accident and the finding on negligence

are not in dispute and the appeal is confined only to quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

9.It is seen from the records that at the time of accident, the

offending vehicle was insured with the appellant Insurance

Company. PW1 is the injured as well as the eye witness to the

accident. A criminal case was registered against the driver of the

tractor. Ex.P1 FIR stands registered, based on the complaint given

by PW1. Ex.P2 Accident Register would show that the injured has

sustained four types of injuries and during treatment, she left the

hospital without giving any intimation to the hospital authorities. It

is to be noted that in the Accident Register, there is no mention

about the injuries sustained by the claimant. Since, the injured

herself left the hospital without intimating the hospital authorities,

the tribunal has come to the conclusion that the injuries sustained

by the injured are simple in nature and hence, no disability can be

assessed and accordingly, the tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.

10,000/- for the simple injuries sustained by her. In the considered

view of this court, the award is fair and reasonable and therefore, it

is confirmed.

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

10.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed,

confirming the award of the tribunal. No costs. Consequently,

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

08.02.2021 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er

To

1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni.

2.The Record Keeper, V.R Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

T.KRISHNAVALLI.J.,

er

C.M.A(MD)No.437 of 2017

08.02.2021

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