Madras High Court
New India Assurance Company Ltd vs C.Shanthi on 24 March, 2022
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.03.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
and
M.P.No.1 of 2012
New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
Pillars Gate, Ballanore Road,
Nagercoil. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.C.Shanthi
2.Darvin Bright
3.Sarala
4.N.Balakrisnan
5.Rubby
6.Thangaiah
(Amended as per Order I.A.No.974/2006
dated 01/09/2006) ... Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated
14.12.2011 passed in M.C.O.P.No.431 of 2004 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge) Chengalpattu.
For Appellant : M/s.Elveera Ravindran
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 1 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
For R1 to R3, R5 & R6 : Mr.K.Varadhakamaraj
JUDGMENT
Challenging the judgment and decree dated 04.09.2012 passed by
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge)
Chengalpattu, in M.C.O.P.No. 431 of 2004, the Insurance Company has
come up with the present Appeal.
2. The first respondent/claimant is the wife, second and third
respondents/claimant are the daughters and fifth and sixth
respondents/claimants are the mother and father of the deceased
T.Chandran, who died in a motor accident. The accident is said to have
taken place on 16.06.2004 at about 2.00 p.m while the deceased was
riding on his motor cycle bearing Registration Number TN-05 A 3050
from Chetty Kulam to Beach Road, near Saralur Junction, an auto
bearing Registration No.TN-74-C-3528 insured with the appellant
Insurance Company belonging to the 4th respondent, which was standing
on the left side of the road, suddenly taken by its driver, who drove the
same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 2 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
As a result of which, the deceased fell down and sustained fatal injuries
on his head.
3. The appellant- Insurance Company has filed a counter affidavit
in which it was stated that the deceased was riding his motor cycle on the
proper side of the road and that the driver of the auto owned by the 4th
respondent has driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner without
following the traffic rules and regulations and had hit the deceased. It is
further stated that the driver of the 4th respondent's vehicle was not
having valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and also
the 4th respondent's vehicle was not insured with the appellant Insurance
Company and hence, the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation
to the respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6.
4. After considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence
on record, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,88,200/- under the
following heads:-
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 3 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
Amount awarded
S.No. Heads by the Tribunal
(Rs.)
1 Loss of earning power 3,12,000/-
(Rs.2,000x12 x13)
2 Medical Expenses 39,200/-
3 Loss of Consortium 15,000/-
4 Loss of love and affection 20,000/-
5 Transport and funeral expenses 2,000/-
Total 3,88,200/-
5. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant – Insurance Company
has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
6. The Tribunal after considering the pleadings, oral and
documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and
negligent driving by the driver of the goods vehicle belonging to the 4 th
respondent and directed the appellant Insurance Company being insurer
of the said vehicle to pay a sum of Rs.3,88,200/- as compensation
together with interest at the rate of 7.5% and cost from the date of the
claim petition to the Respondent Nos.1 to 3, 5 and 6 herein who were the
claimants before the Lower Court.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 4 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
7. The learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company
would submit that the Tribunal failed to note that as per Ex.P.1 - FIR, the
accident was caused by the rash and negligent act of the deceased, who
drove his motor cycle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against
the compound wall and that there was no reason as to how the vehicle
bearing Registration No.TN-74-C-3528 came to be identified as the
vehicle which caused the accident. The learned Tribunal failed to note
that as per Ex.P.2/ Form A.I.R, which clearly shows that the insured
vehicle had no damages. Hence, it clearly proves that the insured
vehicle was not involved in the accident.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants 1
to 3, 5 and 6 would submit that the impugned Judgment and Decree was
a well reasoned one and requires no interference.
9. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned
counsel for the appellant Insurance Company and the learned counsel for
respondents/claimants 1 to 3, 5 and 6 and I have also perused the
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 5 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
evidence on record and the impugned Judgment and Decree passed by
the Tribunal.
10. From a reading of the impugned Judgment and Decree passed
by the Tribunal, it is noticed that the Tribunal had held that the police,
after investigation, laid charge sheet against the driver of the 4th
respondent Auto regarding his negligent act. The driver of the Auto was
acquitted on the reason of benefit of doubt and therefore, the acquittal
has no effect in this case. The Tribunal has came to a conclusion that the
accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the insured
Auto belonging to the 4th respondent.
11. Considering the above, I find no merits in the present Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the appellant Insurance Company.
Therefore, the amount awarded in the impugned Judgment and Decree by
the Tribunal is confirmed.
12. Therefore, the appellant Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the entire compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 6 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
interest and costs as directed by the Tribunal, less any amount already
deposited, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this Judgment.
13. On such deposit, respondents/claimants 1 to 3, 5 and 6 are
permitted to withdraw the same together with interest and costs in the
same proportion as directed by the Tribunal in the impugned Judgment
and Decree, less the amount already withdrawn if any, by filing suitable
applications before the Tribunal.
14. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No
cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
24.03.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking : Non speaking order
kkd
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Principal Subordinate Judge) Chengalpattu.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 7 of 8
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
J.NISHA BANU,J.
kkd
C.M.A.No.2155 of 2012
24.03.2022
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No 8 of 8
