Kalaivani vs Duraibabu
2021 Latest Caselaw 14598 Mad

                                                                                       C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   DATED : 20.07.2021

                                                        CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                  C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

                     1.Kalaivani
                     2.Vinothini(Minor)
                     3.Kaviyarasan (Minor)
                     4.Sindu (Minor)                                             ...       Appellants

                                                           Vs
                     1.Duraibabu
                     2.The Branch Manager,
                       United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
                       P.B.No.172, No.261, J.N.Street,
                       Puducherry.                                        ...   Respondents

                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
                     Vehicles Act against the Award dated 15.06.2015 inMCOP.No.523 of 2009
                     on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, III Additional District
                     Judge Puducherry.


                               For Appellant                : M/s.Sreethi Law Firm
                               For Respondent 2             : Mr.S.Arun Kumar
                               For Respondent 1             : Exparte



                     1/6




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                   C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015




                                                       JUDGMENT

(This case is heard through Video Conferencing) This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed challenging the award

dated 15.06.2015 passed by the Motor Accident claims Tribunal, III

Additional District Judge Puducherry in MCOP.No.523 of 2009.

2. The Appellants/claimants are aggrieved by the findings of the

Tribunal exonerating the second respondent Insurance Company from any

liability on the following grounds that (a) The driver of the insured vehicle

was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the

accident and therefore, the insured has committed policy violation (b) the

Insurance policy Ex.P2 does not give insurance coverage for an

unauthorised passenger as in the case on hand the deceased is said to have

been a coolie (employee of the insured) travelling in the mudguard of the

insured tractor.

3. Admittedly, as seen from the insurance policy, Ex.P2, it gives

insurance coverage only for one person and the word “coolie” is also not

found therein. Registration Certificate (Ex.P3) also permits only one person

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

to travel in the insured Tractor, whereas the deceased was not the driver of

the tractor, but even according to the Appellants/claimants, he was only a

coolie. Registration certificate (Ex.P3) also permits only one person to

travel in the insured Tractor whereas the deceased was not the driver of the

Tractor but even according to the Appellants/claimants, he was only a coolie

employed by the insured and was travelling in the said Tractor in addition

to the driver at the time of the accident.

4. It is settled law that an unauthorised passenger travelling in the

insured vehicle is not entitled to pay compensation. Since the second

respondent has been able to prove before the Tribunal that the deceased was

travelling as an unauthorised passenger in the insured vehicle at the time of

the accident, the second respondent Insurance Company is not liable to pay

compensation to the claimants. The findings of the Tribunal under the

impugned award is a correct finding.

5. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this appeal.

Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. The first

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

respondent, owner of the vehicle is directed to deposit the amount together

with interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, if not already deposited

to the credit of MCOP.No.523 of 2009 within a period of four weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made,

the Tribunal shall transfer the share of award amount to the bank account of

the first Appellant/first claimant through RTGS within a period of one week

thereafter. Since the Appellants 2 to 4/claimants 2 to 4 are minors, their

respective share of award amount shall be deposited in interest bearing fixed

deposit in any one of the Nationalised banks till they attain majority. The

first respondent/first claimant is permitted to withdraw the interest accrued

once in six months for the welfare of the minors. If the minors attain

majority, it is open for them to file a formal petition to declare them as

major. No costs.

20.07.2021 nl

Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

To

1. The III Additional District Judge Puducherry.

2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

nl

C.M.A.No.1901 of 2015

20.07.2021

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