Mahalakshmi vs M. Karan
2021 Latest Caselaw 19434 Mad

                                                                               C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED: 22.09.2021

                                                       CORAM:

                             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

                                             C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017



                      1. Mahalakshmi
                      2. Veeramanikandan
                      3. Sharmila
                      4. Palaniammal                                    .... Appellants

                                                       Versus

                      1. M. Karan,
                      2. M/s. The Oriental Insurance
                                  Company Limited,
                      Oriental House,
                      2nd Floor,
                      New No.216,
                      Old No.115, Prakasam Salai,
                      Broadway,
                      Chennai – 108.                                    ....   Respondents


                               Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
                      Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of compensation against the
                      judgment and decree dated 09.08.2017 in MCOP No.4985 of 2015 on
                      the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Chennai.

                      For Appellants                   : Ms.Ramya V. Rao
                      For Respondents                  : Mr. D. Bhaskaran for R2
                                                         R1 - Unclaimed

http://www.judis.nic.in
                      1/4
                                                                                C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017

                                                       JUDGMENT

(Heard video conference)

This appeal has been filed by the claimants challenging the

judgment and decree dated 09.08.2017 passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge Court of Small Causes, Chennai in MCOP

No.4985 of 2015, under which the claim filed by the appellants was

dismissed.

2. The Tribunal under the impugned judgment and decree

dismissed the claim filed by the appellants in MCOP No.4985 of 2015 on

09.08.2017 on the ground that the deceased himself was a Tortfeasor and

therefore, the claimants are not entitled for compensation under Section

163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

3. It is settled law that the claimants will have to satisfy the

following conditions for seeking compensation under Section 163-A of

the Motor Vehicles Act :

a) the owner – driver is the registered owner of the vehicle insured.

b) the owner – driver is the insured named in the policy.

c) the owner- driver holds an effective driving license.

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017

4. As seen from the Exhibits, which have been marked as Exs.P1 to

P4 and the oral evidence of the appellants / claimants witness (PW1), the

appellants / claimants have not satisfied the aforementioned conditions to

make the Insurance Company liable to pay the compensation.

5. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal

has rightly rejected the claim of the appellants / claimants under the

impugned award on the ground that the deceased himself was a

Tortfeasor.

6. In the result, there is no merit in this appeal and accordingly, this

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

22.09.2021

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

vsi2

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017

vsi2

To

1. The Chief Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai.

2.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai – 104.

C.M.A.No.2950 of 2017

22.09.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in