Madras High Court
Divisional Manager vs K.Rajendran on 26 April, 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 26.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.M.A(MD)Nos.812 and 813 of 2019
and
C.M.P.(MD).No.10553 of 2019
Divisional Manager,
M/s.National Insurance Company Limited,
No.3, North Veli Street,
Madurai District.
... Appellant in both C.M.As
vs.
1.K.Rajendran
2.S.Jamal Maideen ... Respondents in C.M.A(MD).No.812 of 2021
1.R.Vimaladevei
2.S.Jamal Maideen ... Respondents in C.M.A(MD).No.813 of 2019
COMMON PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section
173 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988, to set a side the judgment and decree
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Cum Special Subordinate
Judge, (MCOP Cases), Madurai made in M.C.O.P.Nos.941 and 942 of
2015 dated 04.12.2018.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For Appellant : Mr.R.Rajamani
(In both Cases)
For R1 : Mr.R.Gowri Sankar
(In both Cases)
For R2 : Mr.A.Syed Abdul Kadhar
COMMON JUDGMENT
**********************
These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the National
Insurance Company Limited, challenging, the Judgment and decree
passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.941 and 942 of 2015 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal Cum Special Subordinate Judge (MCOP
Cases) Madurai.
2. The respective first respondent in both C.MAs are the claimants
in both M.C.O.Ps and they were travelled as a rider and the pillion rider
in the two wheeler.
3. After contesting the trial, the Tribunal came to the conclusion
that the owner of the vehicle and the Insurance Company jointly or
severally liable to pay the compensation to the injured/claimant.
Aggrieved over the awarded passed by the Tribunal, the National
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Insurance Company has filed the present appeals under Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
5. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that
at the time of the accident, the rider of the two wheeler does not possess
valid permit to drive the vehicle in the public place, the said fact has
been elicited in the examination of the petitioner witnesses. Exs.R5 and
R6/legal notice issued by the Insurance Company calling upon the owner
of the taxi to produce the permit policy and he has not turned up to
produce the policy and hence, adverse inference has been drawn as
Ex.R3.
6. On perusal of records, it shows that at the time of the accident,
the insured vehicle does not possess valid permit to drive the vehicle and
hence, it is the violation of the policy condition. However, in the decision
in the case of Shamanna vs. Divisional Manager, The Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 8144 of 2018, the Hon'ble
Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that even though the
3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
driver of the offending vehicle did not possess valid permit on the date of
the accident, the Insurance Company may be directed to 'pay' the
compensation amount to the claimant and then, 'recover' the same from
the owner of the offending vehicle. As per the said decision, the pay and
recovery is in order in this case. Therefore, the Insurance Company has
to 'pay' the compensation to the first respondent/claimant in both C.M.As
and then 'recover' the same from the owner of the Car bearing
Registration No. TN 59 V 2209,
7.Quantum of compensation: After going through the award passed
by the Tribunal and also the heads under which the compensation is
awarded, it appears that the same is just and reasonable and it does not
suffer from any illegality or irregularity. Accordingly, the quantum of the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed.
8. In the result,
(i) These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are partly allowed to the
limited extent indicated above. No costs. Consequently, the connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(ii) The quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
upheld.
(iii) The orders passed by the Tribunal, with regard to, the liability
alone is modified and 'pay and recovery' is ordered.
(iv) the Insurance Company to 'pay' the compensation to the first
respondent/claimant in both C.M.As and then 'recover' the same from the
owner of the Car bearing Registration No. TN 59 V 2209.
(v) The appellant – Insurance Company is directed to deposited the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal, i.e., Rs.2,97,000/- and Rs.
40,000/-respectively/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum (if not already deposited) to the credit of M.C.O.P.Nos.941 and
942 of 2015, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum
Special Subordinate Judge, (MCOP Cases), Madurai, within a period of
eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(vi) On such deposit being made by the present appellant, the first
respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the same, in the manner
known to law.
5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
26.04.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Cum Special Subordinate Judge,
(MCOP Cases), Madurai
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.
tta
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A(MD)Nos.812 and 813 of 2019
26.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
