Madras High Court
The Claims Manager vs S.Kottur Gurusamy on 3 January, 2022
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020 &
CMP(MD)No.5332 of 2020
The Claims Manager,
Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited,
No.82, Preetham Plaza First Floor,
Chandragandhi Nagar, Ponmeni,
Bypass Road, Madurai - 625 016. ... Appellant
vs.
S.Kottur Gurusamy ... Respondent
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated
01.07.2019 in MCOP.No.75 of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Virudhunagar District at
Srivilliputhur.
For Appellant :Mr.V.Sakthivel
For Respondent :Mr.N.Tamilmani
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
JUDGMENT
The appellant filed this appeal to set aside the Judgment and
Decree dated 01.07.2019 in MCOP.No.75 of 2019 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.
2. On 04.05.2016, at about 04.30 pm, the respondent / claimant
was riding his Bajaj Discover motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 67
AM 4324 along Sethur - Rajapalayam main road, near Jaigurudev
School. Suddenly, a dog crossed the road and respondent / claimant
applied sudden brake, due to which he fell down and sustained grievous
injuries. Hence, he filed MCOP.No.75 of 2019 claiming compensation
for the injuries sustained by him.
3. The Tribunal after analysing the oral and documentary
evidences on record, awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, as compensation to the respondent
/ claimant. Challenging the award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant
has preferred this appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
4. The learned counsel for the appellant raised a sole ground that
as per GR.36 of Indian Motor Tariff, the owner cannot claim
compensation under Insurance Policy Ex.P8 and therefore, the appellant /
Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation to the respondent /
claimant.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent / claimant contended that
the Insurance Policy is a Package Policy and Rs.50/- has been paid by the
respondent / claimant for claiming compensation for the owner. Hence,
the Tribunal is right in awarding Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent /
claimant and prayed for the appeal to be dismissed.
6. A perusal of the Insurance Policy Ex.P8 shows that it is a
Package Policy and the respondent / claimant has paid Rs.50/- as
premium for claiming compensation for the owner. The counsel who
appeared for the Insurance Company before the Tribunal had admitted
that the Policy is a Package Policy and the respondent / claimant is
entitled to claim compensation up to Rs.1,00,000/- and he cannot claim
compensation more than Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the Tribunal had awarded
compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the respondent / claimant. As per the
Package Policy, the respondent / claimant is entitled to a compensation of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the Tribunal was right in awarding the said
compensation and this Court finds no valid reason to interfere with the
award passed by the Tribunal.
7. In the result,
(i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(ii) The orders passed by the Tribunal is upheld.
03.01.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
mbi
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
S.ANANTHI, J.
mbi
CMA(MD)No.482 of 2020
03.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
