Madras High Court
M/S National Insurance Company ... vs N.Velu ... First on 3 March, 2021
CMA No.2719 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 03.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
CMA.No.2719 of 2012 and
M.P.No.1 of 2012
M/s National Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.165, Nethaji Road, Manjakupam,
Cuddalore. ... Appellant/ II respondent
Vs.
1. N.Velu ... First respondent/ Claimant
2. T. Ananthi ... 2nd respondent/1st respondent
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and
judgment dated 23.02.2012 passed in M.C.O.P.No.2731 of 2008 by the
Additional Subordinate Judge-I, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Kadalore.
For Appellant : Mr. G.Udayasankar
For respondents : R1 and R2 notice served
Page 1 of 8
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved over the orders passed by the Tribunal, the
appellant/ insurance company has filed the present appeal.
2. The first respondent/claimant has filed a claim petition
before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the
injuries sustained by him in a road accident that took place on
21.07.2008.
3. The brief case of the claimant is as follows: On
21.07.2008, at about 7.00 p.m. while the claimant was standing on the
left side road at Subramaniyapuram, a speedy car bearing registration
No.PY-01-AF-5859 hit the claimant, thereby he sustained grievous
injuries and fracture and he was admitted to Government Hospital,
Cuddalore and thereafter, had taken treatment in the private hospitals.
According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of the driver of
car was the cause of accident and since the first respondent/ owner of
the vehicle insured her car with the second respondent/ insurance
company, both of them are liable to pay compensation.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
4. The claim petition was resisted by the second
respondent/ insurance company by filing counter affidavit.
5. Before Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, the claimant
and Dr. Ramalingam were examined as PW1 and PW2 and Ex.P1 to
Ex.P9 were marked. On the side of the respondents, one witness was
examined as RW1 and Ex.R1 and Ex.R2 were marked.
6. After analysing the evidence on record, the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.1,69,751 under various heads, as extracted
hereunder.
Sl Heads Amount in
No Rs.
1 Permanent disability 72,000
2 Pain and sufferings 30,000
3 Loss of income for two 8,000
months
4 Medical expenses 24,751
5 Transportation charges 10,000
6 Extra Nourishment and 25,000
damages to articles
Total 1,69,751
Aggrieved over the award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
the present appeal.
7. Despite notice served to the respondents and their name
were printed in the cause list, none appeared for the respondents.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and I have
perused the materials on record.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/
insurance company submitted that the Tribunal has awarded a huge
amount as compensation and wrongly come to a conclusion that the
insurance company is liable to pay compensation. He further submitted
that the accident was occurred only due to the claimant, who had
suddenly crossed the road, under intoxication, and therefore, there is no
contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the car. He also
submitted that there is no evidence to prove the income of the claimant,
however, the Tribunal has fixed huge amount of Rs.4,000/- as monthly
income and hence, the award passed by the Tribunal warrants
interference by this court.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
10. Now the point for determination is whether the
insurance company is liable to pay compensation to the claimant?
11. POINT
Dr. Ramalingam, who has given disability certificate Ex.P8,
was examined as PW2 and he has assessed the disability suffered by the
claimant as 30%. However, the Tribunal has fixed the disability
suffered by the claimant as 10% and has awarded a sum of Rs.72,000/-
towards " Permanent disability". Further after elaborate discussion and
by considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature
of injuries sustained by the claimant, has awarded a just and reasonable
compensation under the heads " Pain and sufferings", "Loss of income",
"Medical expenses", "Transportation Charges" and " Extra nourishment
and damages to articles". Therefore, this court opines that there is no
error on the findings of the Tribunal and it does not warrants any
interference by this court.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
12. The next contention of the appellant is that the claimant
had crossed the road under the influence of intoxication on the date of
accident and hence, the negligence is only on the part of the claimant
and therefore, the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation.
But this aspect was elaborately discussed by the Tribunal and has
rightly come to the conclusion that the insurance company has not
proved their case by putting the claimant into blood test and filing
report. Hence, this court is of the view that the Tribunal has rightly
come to the conclusion that since on the date of accident, the first
respondent insured her vehicle with the second respondent, both of them
are liable to pay compensation. Accordingly the point is answered as
against the appellant/insurance company and the appeal fails.
13. In the result,
(i) The civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. No costs.
The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(ii) The appellant/insurance company is directed to deposit
the compensation as awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the
rate of 7.5.% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit,
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
less the amount if already deposited, within a period of six 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.
03.03.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/non Speaking order
mst
To
1. The Additional Subordinate Judge-I, Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Caddalore.
2. The M/s National Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.165, Nethaji Road, Manjakupam, Cuddalore.
3. Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madras High Court, Chennai-104.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.2719 of 2012
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
mst
CMA. No.2719 of 2012
and
M.P.No. 1 of 2012
03.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
