Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8320 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 April, 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.M.A(MD)No.1148 of 2014
and
C.M.P(MD)No.40 of 2022
The New India Assurance Company Limited,
represented by its Manager,
Branch at Nagercoil,
Agasteeswaram Taluk,
Kanyakumari District :Appellant/Respondent
.vs.
1.Sandhya,
2.Saraswathy Amma
3.Sivasankar
(Name of third respondent is amended and he is declared as
major by removing his guardianship vide order of this Court
made in C.M.P(MD)Nos.35 and 38 of 2022 in C.M.A(MD)No.
1148 of 2014, dated 23.3.2022)
:Respondents/Petitioners
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and decree made
M.C.O.P.No.3 of 2011, dated 8.3.2012, on the file of the subordinate
Judge(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Padmanabhapuram.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For Appellant :Mr.S.Ramesh
For Respondents :Mr.G.Pitchaimani
1 to 3 for Mr.K.N.Thampi
JUDGMENT
*********
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the
judgment and decree made M.C.O.P.No.3 of 2011, dated 8.3.2012,
on the file of the sub-ordinate Judge(The Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal), Padmanabhapuram.
2.The short point that arose for consideration is whether the
Insurance coverage is available for the claim made in M.C.O.P.No.3
of 2011?
3.The deceased is the owner of the vehicle. The claim
petitioners are the legal representatives of the deceasaed, who
travelled in the car as an occupant. The vehicle met with an
accident and husband of the first claim petitioner died in the
accident.
4.The Insurance Company filed a counter statement before
the Tribunal stating that at the time of accident, as per Ex.R1-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Policy, it is only an Act-I Policy, covering only third party claim and
not an occupant of the car. The admitted factual position is that the
deceased travelled in the car as an occupant.
5.I had perused the Ex.R1 Policy copy. I find that it is a
Standard Private Car-Liability Policy. Premium for the basic third
party liability is paid and hence, I find that for the occupant of the
car, there is no policy coverage and hence, the Insurance Company
cannot be mulcted with the liability and hence the
appellant/Insurance Company is exonerated from its liability to pay
compensation to the claimants and the claimants are not entitled for
any compensation from the appellant/Insurance Companyand hence
the M.C.O.P.No. 3 of 2011, on the file of the subordinate
Judge(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Padmanabhapuram stands
dismissed.
6.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to the extent as
indicated above.No costs.Consequently, connected Misellaneous
Petition is closed.
20.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
vsn
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuam.
2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.
vsn
JUDGMENT MADE IN C.M.A(MD)No.1148 of 2014 and C.M.P(MD)No.40 of 2022
20.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!