Madras High Court
The New India Assurance Company ... vs Minor.Kalaiarasi on 19 February, 2021
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 19.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
and
M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2010
The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
No.34, Alagarkovil Road
Tallakulam, Madurai-625 001 ... Appellant
-vs-
1.Minor.Kalaiarasi
(rep.by her father Palraj)
[R1 declared as major vide Judgment dated 19.02.2021]
2.Sedapatti Agro Engineer Co-operative
Service Centre Limited
Saptoor Post
Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree, dated 22.03.2010
in M.C.O.P.No.616 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal /
I Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
___________
Page 1 of 6
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
For Appellant : Mr.B.Vijay Karthikeyan
For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasundaram for R1
No appearance for R2
JUDGMENT
This civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company challenging the Award, dated 22.03.2010, passed in M.C.O.P.No.616
of 2006, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / I Additional Sub Court,
Madurai.
2. This is a case of injury. The claimant was a minor aged about 12
years and she sustained injuries in the accident took place on 15.08.2005.
The claimant would state that she was proceeding in a bicycle in Madurai
Town on the left side of the road and when she was nearing Somu Travels
Office, a Tractor bearing registration No.TN58 C3931 belonging to the second
respondent – Society came in a rash and negligent manner and hit against
her. In the accident, the claimant sustained injuries and fractures. So, she
was admitted in Christian Mission Hospital, Madurai, where she took
treatment till 06.09.2005. During treatment period, the claimant underwent a
___________
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
surgery and a steel plate was fixed. She claimed compensation of
Rs.2,00,000/-, but the Tribunal awarded Rs.92,959/- as compensation.
3. The contention of the appellant – Insurance Company before the
Tribunal was that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid driving
licence and the claim was excessive.
4. In order to prove the negligence, the claimant examined herself as
P.W.1 and she produced Ex.P1 - First Information Report to show that a
criminal case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle. Ex.P4
shows that final report was filed against the driver of the offending vehicle and
he was convicted by the Criminal Court and the Judgment copy was marked
as Ex.P5. The Tribunal, on the basis of the evidence referred above, came to
the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of
the offending vehicle / Tractor.
5. The appellant – Insurance Company examined three witnesses to
show that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid driving licence.
A perusal of the Judgment of the Tribunal shows that the appellant –
Insurance Company did not issue notice to the insured seeking particulars of
___________
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
the driving licence of the driver. The driver of the offending vehicle was also
not examined before the Tribunal. It is true that R.W.2, who was working as
Junior Assistant in the second respondent – Society, deposed that he did not
know about the driving licence particulars of the offending vehicle's driver.
Since the appellant – Insurance Company has not discharged its liability to
prove that the vehicle was driven by a person, who did not have valid driving
licence, the Tribunal has rightly fixed the liability to pay the compensation on
the appellant – Insurance Company. I find no valid ground to interfere with
the findings of the Tribunal.
6. The claim petition is of the year 2006 and at that relevant point of
time, the first respondent - claimant was a minor and by now, she should
have become major. So, the claimant is declared as major and the Tribunal is
hereby directed to disburse her award amount.
7. In the light of the above facts, I do not find any merit in this civil
miscellaneous appeal and the same is therefore dismissed. Since the appeal is
dismissed, the appellant – Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire
award amount with accrued interest and costs, less the amount already
deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a
___________
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
copy of this Judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to
withdraw the award amount, less the amount already withdrawn, if any,
together with interest and costs. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
19.02.2021
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Note :
In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a
web copy of the Judgment may be
utilized for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of the
Judgment that is presented is the
correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate /
litigant concerned.
krk
To:
1.The I Additional Sub Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Madurai.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
___________
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
krk
C.M.A.(MD) No.1305 of 2010
and
M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2010
19.02.2021
___________
http://www.judis.nic.in
