The Divisional Manager vs Arumugam
2022 Latest Caselaw 3969 Mad

                                                                             CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATED : 02.03.2022

                                                      CORAM :

                         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

                                              CMA (MD)No.1362 of 2011
                                                       and
                                                MP(MD) No.1 of 2011

                  The Divisional Manager,
                  United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
                  Jeeva Jothi Buildings,
                  Salai Road,
                  Dindigul                                                   ... Appellant

                                                         Vs.
                  1.Arumugam

                  2.Ramesh Babu                                                   ... Respondents


                  PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
                  Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated
                  27.06.2011 passed in M.C.O.P.No.205 of 2008 on the file of the Motor
                  Accident claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dindigul.


                                  For Appellant     : Mr.A.S.Mathialagan
                                  For R2            : Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu

                                  For R1            : No appearance



                  1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                            CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

                                                    JUDGMENT

The insurance company is the appellant. The insurance company

challenging the award passed in MCOP No.205 of 2008, whereby, the

Tribunal has awarded compensation for the person injured in the accident

and since the driver of the offending vehicle does not possess the requisite

badge for driving the light motor goods vehicle, the Tribunal has ordered

pay and recovery, has preferred the present appeal.

2.The learned counsel for the appellant / insurance company

insists upon Ex.P1-FIR that in the FIR the injured has not described that he

is the owner of the goods. However, in the evidence as PW1, has deposed

so before the Court. Hence, his evidence has to be disbelieved.

3.After perusing the FIR and also the chief examination of PW1

and the cross examination of RW2, the Tribunal has held that the injured

has travelled in the van as the owner of the goods. It is settled law that FIR

is not an encyclopedia of the entire facts. The evidence of PW1 is accepted

by the Tribunal. Besides, RW2- Officer of the Insurance Company has

admitted that “kDjhuh; gazp vd;w mog;gilapy; ,e;j thfdj;jpy; gazk; bra;jij fhl;l tprhuiz bra;j mwpf;ifia jhf;fy; bra;atpy;iy vd;why;

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

rhpjhd;”. However, he has denied the liability. Admittedly, the Investigation

Report was not filed by the Insurance Company. The Tribunal has taken an

adverse inference for non-filing of the investigation report and for that

reason, believed the evidence of PW1 that he travelled in the vehicle as the

owner of the goods. The factual finding arrived at by the tribunal appears

to be just and reasonable and therefore, in view of the subsistence of the

policy, the Insurance Company is not liable under the policy. However,

based upon the judicial pronouncement, the Tribunal has ordered to “pay

and recover”. Hence, I do not find any error in the said finding.

4.On the quantum of compensation for the injuries, a sum of

Rs.50,000/- awarded for pain and sufferings is reduced to Rs.25,000/-.

With regard to Ex.P4-Medical bills, no documents has been produced in

the appeal. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

reduced from Rs.1,45,500/- to Rs.1,20,500/- which shall carry interest

at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

5. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to the

extent indicated above partly. The quantum of compensation awarded by

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

the Tribunal is reduced from Rs.1,45,500/- to Rs.1,20,500/-.

The appellant – Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation

awarded by this court, i.e., Rs.1,20,500/- together with interest at the rate of

7.5% per annum (if not already deposited) to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.205

of 2008, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Dindigul within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt

of a copy of this order and then recover the same from the second

respondent/ owner of the motorcycle in the manner known to law. On such

deposit being made by the appellant, the first respondent/claimant is

permitted to withdraw the same, in the manner known to law. If, the

appellant/Insurance Company had already deposited the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal to the credit of the said MCOP, then, they are at

liberty to withdraw the balance amount which is in excess of the amount

awarded by this Court after following due process of law. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

02.03.2022

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

To

1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dindigul.

2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J.,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA.(MD)No.1362 of 2011

cp

CMA (MD)No.1362 of 2011 and MP(MD) No.1 of 2011

02.03.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis