Madras High Court
National Insurance Co. Ltd vs P.Neelavathi (Died) on 7 December, 2022
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
and
M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2009
National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Jeorme Building, 1st Floor,
Fort Station Road,
Trichy – 2. ... Appellant
vs.
1.P.Neelavathi (Died)
2.R.Velusamy
3.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
Tiruchirappalli.
4.Anbarasan
5.Aravindkumar
6.Anusuya Devi ... Respondents
[R4 to R6 are brought on record as LRs. of the
deceased first respondent, vide order dated
07.12.2022, made in C.M.P.(MD)Nos.11099,
11100 and 11102 of 2022]
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the fair and decreetal order dated 23.10.2008,
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
made in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2000, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Srinivasaraghavan
For 1st Respondent : No Appearance
For 2nd Respondent : No Appearance
For 3rd Respondent : Mr.Prakash
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichy, partially allowing the claim
petition filed by one Leelavathi/first respondent, who filed the claim petition, has
met the maker pending appeal. The legal representatives have been brought on
record.
2. The Tribunal considering the claim petition for compensation of
Rs.1,00,000/- for the grievous injury sustained by the first respondent/claimant
while she was travelling in the Transport Corporation bus. On 25.03.1999, the
accident alleged to have happened when the lorry dashed behind the bus. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
first respondent/claimant lost her balance and hit herself against the iron rod and
sustained injury. She was treated as inpatient in the Railway Hospital at Ponmalai
for 15 days, since she has sustained severe injury on thigh and hip. After 15 days
treatment as inpatient, she was advised to take treatment as outpatient. Alleging
that the injury sustained by her is grievous in nature, she claimed Rs.1,00,000/- as
compensation from the owner of the lorry, its insurer and the Managing Director
of the Transport Corporation.
3. The Tribunal after considering the evidence and the defence taken by
the Insurance Company, partially allowed the claim petition, awarding
compensation of Rs.41,500/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. against the
owner of the lorry and its insurer.
4. Being aggrieved by the award, the Insurance Company has preferred
this civil miscellaneous appeal.
5. According to the appellant, the trial Court erred in not considering
the fact that except the first respondent/claimant, no one was injured in the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
accident. The narration about the accident appears to be imaginary and
exaggerated one. Further, regarding the accident, the F.I.R., was not lodged
immediately. This also leads to suspicion that the content of the F.I.R. is not true,
but concocted.
6. Taking exception to the evidence of P.W.1 and the content of Ex.P.3
Medical Bills, the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company would
submit that it is improbable for the claimant alone in the whole bus to sustain
injury, when the alleged impact from behind by the lorry, insured under the
appellant Insurance Company.
7. This Court on perusing the evidence of P.W.1/claimant and the
outpatient chit, marked as Ex.P.2 and the testimony of Exs.P.5 and P.6 hospital
case sheet and disability certificate respectively, finds that the nature of injury
sustained by the first respondent/claimant is akin to accidental injuries and the
contemporaneous documents indicate that she sustained injury while travelling in
the bus, which was subjected to the accident. The driver of the lorry, who hit the
bus, has pleaded guilty before the Magistrate Court and paid the fine amount. A
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
copy of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Trichy, in
C.C.No.910 of 1999 is marked as Ex.R.1. Therefore, the occurrence of the
accident and the injuries sustained are proved. In such circumstances, taking into
the age of the victim and the nature of the injuries, the compensation of
Rs.41,500/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. does not appear to be on a higher side, since
the first respondent/claimant sustained grievous injury and has been hospitalized
for more than 15 days as inpatient and even after discharge from the Hospital, has
not regained her full capacity and ability to carry on her day-to-day work.
8. This Court finds no merit in the appeal. Hence, this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. As pointed out earlier, pending appeal, the
first respondent/injured claimant died leaving behind her legal heirs as
respondents 4 to 6. The award amount with accumulated interest shall be
apportioned between the respondents 4 to 6 equally. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Index : Yes / No 07.12.2022
Internet : Yes
smn2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
smn2
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A.(MD)No.1057 of 2009
DATED : 07.12.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
