R.Balaji vs M.D.Rahamathullah
2021 Latest Caselaw 12734 Mad

                                                                                    C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 30.06.2021

                                                          CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                                C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

                     R.Balaji                                         ...                 Appellant

                                                             ..Vs..

                     1. M.D.Rahamathullah
                     2. M/s.United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
                     No.38, Anna Salai,
                     Chennai – 2.                                      ...             Respondent

                     Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor

                     Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and decree dated 28.11.2014

                     made in MACTOP.No.3190 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident

                     Claims Tribunal, VI Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.



                                     For Appellant        : Mr.F.Terry Chellaraja

                                     For 2nd Respondent   : Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam




                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

                                                    JUDGMENT

(This Appeal has been taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing)

This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the impugned

award dated 28.11.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal IV

Court of Small Causes, Chennai in MACTOP No.3109 of 2003 rejecting the

claim of the appellant/claimant.

2. The Tribunal, under the impugned award has rejected the claim

only on the ground that the appellant / claimant ought to have filed the

claim under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act as he has not placed

any evidence to prove the negligence of the driver of the insured vehicle.

The subject vehicle has been insured with the second respondent/insurance

company in this appeal.

3. Heard Mr.F.Terry Chellaraja, learned counsel for the Appellant /

Claimant as well as Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, learned counsel for the

Second Respondent / Insurance Company.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

4. The learned counsel for the Appellant drew the attention of this

Court to the impugned award dated 28.11.2014 passed in MACTOP

No.3190 of 2003 as well as the claim petition filed by the Appellant /

claimant before the Tribunal and would submit that it clearly reveals that the

claim petition was filed only under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles

Act.

5. This Court has also perused and examined the impugned award as

well as the claim petition filed by the appellant/claimant before the

Tribunal. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the

Appellant/claimant, which is also not seriously disputed by the learned

counsel representing the second respondent/insurance company, the claim

petition was infact filed by the appellant/claimant only under Section

163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act when the negligence need not be proved

and not under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Hence, this Court is

of the considered view that by non-application of mind, the impugned award

has been passed rejecting the claim of the appellant/claimant. Hence, the

matter will have to be remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

on merits and in accordance with law by treating the claim petition as one

filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act and not under Section

166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. However, in view of the long pendency of this appeal and in view

of the fact that the accident happened as early as in the year 2003 itself, a

time frame will have to be fixed by this Court for early disposal of the claim

petition on the matter getting remanded.

7. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned award dated 28.11.2014

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Judge, Court of Small

Causes, Chennai in MCOP.NO.3190 of 2003 is hereby set aside and the

matter is remanded back to the very same Tribunal for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in

accordance with law by treating the claim petition as one filed under Section

163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, after affording sufficient opportunity to

the appellant/claimant as well as the respondents and also permitting them

to adduce fresh evidence, if required by them, with regard to their respective

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

contentions and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible,

preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order.

8. With the aforesaid direction, this appeal shall stand disposed of. No

costs.

30.06.2021 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No rgr

To

1. The VI Judge Small Causes Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai.

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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

rgr

C.M.A.No.1719 of 2016

30.06.2021

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