Madras High Court
Reliance General Insurance ... vs Dhanalakshmi on 12 January, 2022
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.21829 of 2021
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
Reliance House,
No.6, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Dhanalakshmi
2.Natarajan
3.Selvakumar
... Respondents
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act 1988 against the Judgment and Decree made in MCOP No.901 of
2018 dated 30.06.2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Court
of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.Harini for
M/s M.B.Gopalan Associates
***
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
This appeal arises out of the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai in MCOP No.901 of 2018 dated
30.06.2021.
2.This is the case of fatal accident. The case of the claimants are that on
30.12.2017 at 00.45 hours, the deceased Subbaiah was travelling as pillion rider
in a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.TN-19-S-6764 on 100 Feet Road,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
Nungambakkam. When the said vehicle was nearing Oswal Sanitary and Granite
Shop, the rider of the motorcycle rode the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the M.M.D.A bus stop pillar and caused fatal injuries to the
deceased. The third respondent herein is owner and the appellant is the insurer of
the offending vehicle. Alleging that the accident had taken place due to the rash
and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle, the parents of the deceased laid
a petition, claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-.
3.Resisting the claim, the appellant Insurance Company filed their counter
disputing the manner of accident, age, occupation and income of the deceased and
its liability to pay the compensation. It was also contended that the amount of
compensation claimed under various heads is highly excessive.
4.To substantiate the case, on the side of the claimants, P.Ws.1 to 3 were
examined and Exs.P1 to Ex.P.17 were marked. On the side of the
appellant/Insurance Company, no document was marked and no witness was
examined.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
5.The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, fixed
90% negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle and 10% negligence on
the part of the deceased. Further, the Tribunal, after deducting 10% of the award
amount for the negligence of the deceased, awarded Rs.21,92,000/- to the
claimants. Assailing the award, the appellant Insurance Company has filed the
present appeal.
6.Heard Ms.Harini, learned counsel appearing for the appellant Insurance
Company and perused the materials available on record.
7.This appeal has been filed only challenging the quantum, hence, the other
issues need not be dealt with herein.
8.Though the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company has
contended that the award is on the higher side and it requires reduction, on
perusal of the records, we find that the Tribunal, on proper appreciation of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
evidence of Salary Slip (Ex.P.15), has fixed the monthly income and adopting
correct multiplier by following the case of Sarala Verma and others vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation and another reported in 2009 TN MAC 1 has awarded
a just and reasonable compensation under the head of loss of dependency.
Further, the quantum of compensation under remaining heads were fixed by the
Tribunal by following the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Ltd., vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in
2017(2) TNMAC 609 (SC). The deduction of 10% for negligence of the
deceased and the rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal are confirmed. We find no
reason to interfere with the conclusion reached by the Tribunal. This appeal has
no merit. Hence, this appeal is liable to be dismissed.
9.In such view of the matter, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed
as devoid of merits. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
entire award amount with accrued interest and costs, less the amount already
deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order. On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the award
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
amount, as apportioned by the Tribunal, less the amount already withdrawn, if
any, together with proportionate interest and costs. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S.,J.] [V.S.G.,J.]
12.01.2022
skn
Intex : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2.V.R.Section,
Madras High Court,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
skn
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A.No.3718 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.21829 of 2021
12.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
