Madras High Court
The New India Assurance Company ... vs Dhasarathan on 30 September, 2021
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
M.L.Complex, First Floor,
10/11, Church Road,
Dharapuram. .. Appellant
Vs.
1. Dhasarathan
2. Kumaresan
3. Jothimani .. Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1989 seeking to set aside the award and decree dated
16.07.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.755 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Dharapuram.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Sivakumar
For Respondent 1 : No appearance
-----
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/5
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
JUDGMENT
(The case has been heard through video conference)
This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the
award dated 16.07.2014, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Subordinate Court, Dharapuram in M.C.O.P.No.755 of 2012.
2. The appellant insurance company has challenged the impugned
award on the following grounds:
(a) The driver of the insured mini door auto
bearing Registration No.TN 20 AV 6315 was not
possessing the necessary badge to drive the mini
door auto on the date of the accident.
(b) The first respondent / claimant was an
unauthorised passenger in the mini door auto
(insured vehicle).
3. Heard Mr.R.Sivakumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
insurance company. The first respondent / claimant has been duly served in
this appeal and his name has also been printed in the cause list today,
however, there is no representation on his side.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
4. In so far as the contention raised by the appellant insurance
company is concerned, the issue is now well settled by the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mukund Dewagan Vs. Oriental
Insurance Company Limited reported in 2017 AIR (SC) 3668. In the said
decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that there is no necessity for
separate badge for driving goods vehicle, which is less than 7500 kgs.
Admittedly in the instant case, the mini door auto (insured vehicle) weighs
be less than 700 kgs and therefore the first contention of the appellant
insurance company is rejected by this Court.
5. In so far as the second contention raised by the appellant insurance
company that the first respondent/claimant was a gratuitous passenger is
concerned, the appellant insurance company has not filed the insurance
policy before the Tribunal. Therefore, they cannot take a plea now that the
insurance policy does not give coverage to the first respondent/claimant.
Therefore, the second contention of the appellant insurance company is also
rejected by this Court.
6. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this appeal and
accordingly this appeal is dismissed. The appellant insurance company is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
directed to deposit the award amount along with interest and costs, less the
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.755 of
2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court,
Dharapuram. On such deposit of the compensation amount, the first
respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount along with
interest and costs, less the amount, if any, already withdrawn by making
necessary applications before the Tribunal. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
30.09.2021
Index : Yes / No
kk
To
1. The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Dharapuram.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
kk
C.M.A.No.3206 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
30.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
