M/S.United India Insurance ... vs Ibahim @ Syed Ibrahim ...1St
2021 Latest Caselaw 4071 Mad

                                                                             CMA.No.652 of 2015
                                                                            and M.P.No.1 of 2015

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 17.02.2021

                                                        CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

                                                 CMA.No.652 of 2015
                                                        and
                                                  M.P.No.1 of 2015

                    M/s.United India Insurance Company Limited,
                    Andiappan Gramani Street,
                    Royapuram, Chennai – 600 013.                 ...Appellant/3 rd
                    Respondent
                                                          Vs.
                    1.Ibahim @ Syed Ibrahim                       ...1st
                    Respondent/Petitioner

                    2.G.Ramesh                                    ...2nd Respondent/
                                                                           1st Respondent

                    PRAYER: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under
                    Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against decree and the
                    judgment dated 07.10.2014, passed in MCOP.No. 3772 of 2012, on
                    the file of the Motor Accidents Tribunal (IV SCC), Chennai.


                                   For Appellant          : Mr.G.Udayasankar
                                   For Respondents        : No appearance


                                                     JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the

appellant/Insurance Company against the award passed by the

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

CMA.No.652 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

Tribunal in MCOP.No.3772 of 2012.

2.The claimant/first respondent herein has filed a petition

in M.C.O.P.No.3772 of 2012, for claiming compensation for the

injuries sustained in the road transport accident.

3.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. No

appearance on behalf of the respondents.

4.The second respondent herein is the owner of the vehicle.

Before the Tribunal, the Insurance Company has contended that the

offender vehicle viz., Auto does not possess fitness certificate to

carry goods on the date of the accident.

5.Before the Tribunal, during the course of Trial, on the

side of the petitioner PW1, PW2, PW3 were examined and marked

Exs. P1 to P13 and on the side of the respondents, one

U.Raghupathy assisted for RDO Office was examined as RW1 and

Administrative Officer of the Insurance Company was examined as

RW2 and marked Exs.R1 to R4

6.Based upon the evidence adduced before the Trial Court,

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

CMA.No.652 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

i.e., RW1, Ex.R1/Authorization letter of RW1 and Ex.R2/Particulars

issued by RDO office, it is seen that on the date of the accident

there is no fitness certificate available for the offender vehicle.

Based upon the other evidence, the Tribunal has held that accident

has taken place due to the rash and negligence driving of the driver

of the offender vehicle and in the absence of any challenge to the

finding, the factum of the accident, manner of the accident and the

rash and negligence driving on the part of the driver of the second

respondent's vehicle viz., G.Ramesh, is hereby confirmed.

7.In view of the plea raised in the counter statement filed

by the appellant/Insurance Company, based upon the Judgment

reported in 2010 ACJ 2046 - United India Insurance Company

Limited Vs. Saravanan and another, the Tribunal has rightly

come to the conclusion that the driving of the vehicle without

fitness certificate is violation of the rules and since the victim is a

third party, the Insurance Company was directed to pay award

amount to the petitioner/claimant at the first instance and to

recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

8.After perusing the evidence and also the documentary

evidence from Ex.P3/Discharge summary, Ex.P11/Disability

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

CMA.No.652 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

Certificate issued by PW2/Dr.J.R.R.Thiagarajan and the various

heads of compensation, this Court finds that the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is just and necessary. Accordingly, this

Court does not find any error in pay and recovery issued by the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and it is perfectly legal and does

not suffer from any irregularity or illegality.

9.In this view of the matter, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal

stands dismissed and the compensation awarded in MCOP.No.3772

of 2012, by the Motor Accidents Tribunal (IV SCC), Chennai, dated

07.10.2014 is hereby confirmed. No costs. Consequently

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

17.02.2021

dua Index:Yes Internet:Yes Speaking Order:Yes

To The Motor Accidents Tribunal (IV SCC), Chennai.

CMA.No.652 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

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