Madras High Court
The Branch Manager vs Amirtham ... First on 24 February, 2021
CMA No.1242 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 24.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
CMA.No.1242 of 2013 and
M.P.No.1 of 2013
The Branch Manager,
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Motor third party claims office,
No.60, 70 Sheikpet Nadu Street,
Kancheepuram, 631 501. ... Appellant/3rd respondent
Vs.
1. Amirtham ... first respondent/ Claimant
2. V. Jayakanthan ... second respondent/ first respondent
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and
judgment dated 12.04.2012 passed in MCOP No.251 of 2007 by the
Principal Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Chengalpattu.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
For Appellant : Mr. J.Chandran
For respondents : No appearance for R1
Notice served to R2.
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved over the award passed by the Tribunal, the
insurance company has filed the present appeal challenging the liability.
2. The claimant has filed a claim petition before the
Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.50,000/- for the injuries sustained
by her in a road accident that took place on 04.04.2005.
3. The brief case of the claimants is as follows: The
claimant was a vegetable vendor and on 04.04.2005 at about 8.00
hours, the claimant was travelling in a tempo van bearing registration
No.TN-22-C-1356 from her Village to Koyambedu along with the other
vegetable vendors and while nearing Andal-Azhagar Engineering
College at Mamandur Village, the driver of the tempo van drove the
vehicle rashly and negligently, thereby the front tyre of the tempo van
busted and due to the impact, the petitioner and other vendors sustained
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
multiple injuries and immediately, the petitioner was admitted to
Government Hospital, Chengalpattu and was treated as inpatient from
04.04.2005 to 07.04.2005 and then taking treatment in Government
Hospital as well in the Private Hospital. According to the claimant,
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the tempo van was the
cause of accident and since the first respondent insured his vehicle with
the second respondent/ insurance company, both of them are liable to
pay compensation.
4. The claim petition was resisted by the Insurance
company by filing counter affidavit.
5. Before Tribunal, three claim petitions in MCOP No.247,
250, and 251 of 2007 were filed by three persons, who sustained
injuries in the same accident that took place on 04.04.2005 and on the
side of the claimants, three witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW3
and Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 were marked and on the side of the respondents,
one witness was examined and Ex.R1 to Ex.R3 were marked. As far as
the claimant in the instant case is concerned, she filed MCOP No.251 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
2007 and she was examined as PW3 and Ex.P5 to Ex.P8 were marked.
6. After analysing the evidence on record, the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.24,000/- as compensation to the claimant under
various heads as extracted hereunder.
Sl Heads Amount in
No Rs.
1 Loss of earning 3000x3 9,000
2 Transportation charges 2,000
3 Extra Nourishment 1,000
4 Pain and sufferings 12,000
Total 24,000
Aggrieved over the Award passed by the Tribunal, the present appeal
has been fled by the insurance company.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the
counsel for the claimant and I have perused the materials on record.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/insurance company submitted that the on the date of accident,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
numerous persons were travelled in the tempo goods van and hence,
they are the gratuitous passengers, which is the violation of the terms
and conditions of the policy as well as the conditions of Permit and
Registration Certificate and therefore the Insurance company is not
liable to pay compensation to the gratuitous passengers and hence, the
orders passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside.
9. Now the point for consideration is whether the insurance
company is liable to pay compensation to the claimant.
10. Point
The only contention of the appellant/ insurance company is
that the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation, since, on
the date of accident, numerous persons were travelled in the tempo van
as gratuitous passengers and hence, the insurance company is not liable
to pay compensation. The Tribunal in its findings has discussed that
“ as per the insurance policy, premium has been paid for 5 vendors ,
however, only 4 persons have filed petition for compensation and
hence, the contention of the insurance company that the claimants are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
not entitled for compensation is unsustainable ”. To disprove the
above findings, the insurance company has not filed any materials
before this court. Therefore, the above findings of the Tribunal does
not warrant any interference by this court. The appellant has not raised
any ground against the quantum of compensation. Accordingly, the
appeal fails. The point is answered accordingly.
11. In the result,
(i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No
costs. The connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
(ii) The appellant/insurance company is directed to deposit
the compensation of Rs.24,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5.% p.a.
from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit, less the amount if
already deposited, within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) On such deposit being made by the insurance
company, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same, after following
due process of law.
24.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/non Speaking order
mst
To
1. The Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu.
2. The Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Motor third party claims office, No.60, 70 Sheikpet Nadu Street,
Kancheepuram, 631 501.
3. Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madras High Court, Chennai – 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.1242 of 2013
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
mst
CMA. No.1242 of 2013 and
M.P.No.1 of 2013
24.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
