M/S.Reliance General Insurance vs S.Suryakala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6353 Mad

                                                                            CMA No.2159 of 2017


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 29.03.2022

                                                         CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

                                               C.M.A.No.2159 of 2017
                                                      and
                                               CMP.No.11469 of 2017

                     M/s.Reliance General Insurance
                     Company Ltd.,
                     Reliance House, 6th Floor,
                     Nungambakkam,
                     Chennai – 600 006.                    ...               Appellant
                                                           Vs.
                     1.S.Suryakala
                     2.J.Sekar                             ...               Respondents

                     Prayer: This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed under Section 173 of
                     M.V.Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 25.01.2017 made in
                     M.C.O.P.No.4107 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
                     Tribunal, III Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

                                         For Appellant      : Ms.P.Vijayalakshmi
                                                              for Mr.S.Arun Kumar

                                         For Respondents    : Mr.R.Nalliappan



                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              CMA No.2159 of 2017

                                                              JUDGMENT

The second respondent/the Reliance General Insurance Company

Ltd., in MCOP No.4107 of 2013, on the file of the III Court of Small

Causes, Chennai/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, is the appellant herein.

They are aggrieved by grant of compensation for injuries suffered by the

claimant S.Suryakala, when she was travelling as pillion rider in a

motorcycle bearing registration No.TN 07 AM 1923, which was driven by

her husband J.Sekar, who was shown as the first respondent before the

Tribunal and the second respondent before this Court.

2.The accident occurred on 06.07.2013 at around 5.40 p.m. near

Murugan Kalyana Mandapam, in 100 feet road, Velacherry, when an

unknown car dashed against the motorcycle, owing to which, as pillion

rider, the claimant/Suryakala suffered injuries, which were as follows:

1.Fracture over left leg.

2.Fracture over left jaw.

3.Abrasions over Chin.

4.Contusion over Chest and hip.

5.Multiple injuries all over the body.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.2159 of 2017

3.In connection with the accident, FIR had been registered as Ex.P5

and consequent to the investigation, final report had been filed by the Sub

Inspector of Police, Guindy Traffic Investigation Police, which had been

marked as Ex.R4. The Tribunal had observed, that the accident had

occurred only owing to rash and negligent manner, in which, the unknown

car was driven but still proceeded to grant compensation to be paid by the

insurer of the motorcycle, in which, the claimant was the pillion rider.

4.When no negligence is attributed to the driver of the motorcycle,

the insurer of the motorcycle cannot be directed to pay compensation or

indemnify the owner for other damages caused to the motorcycle or injuries

caused while travelling in the motorcycle. Ex.R4 is very clear that the

accident occurred only due to rash and negligent manner, in which, the

untraceable car was driven and dashed against the motorcycle. The

appellant herein as insurer of the motorcycle bearing registration No.TN 07

AM 1923 cannot be directed to indemnify the compensation granted since,

the motorcycle was not the cause for the accident.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.2159 of 2017

5.It is claimed by the learned counsel for the first respondent that

though the claim petition has been filed under Section 166 of the M.V.Act,

1988, this Court can convert it into a petition under Section 163A of

M.V.Act, 1988. That is not possible. Both Section 166 M.V.Act 1988 and

Section 163A M.V.Act 1988 are mutually exclusive and independent of

each other. Under Section 166 of M.V.Act, 1988, a burden is cast to prove

negligence and if the same is not proved, then the claim petition fails.

Under Section 163A of M.V.Act, there is no need to prove negligence and

compensation is granted on the basis of second schedule to the Act on the

basis of no-fault liability to third party.

6.In the instant case, negligence cannot be attributed to the

motorcycle as is evident from the copy of the final report marked as Ex.R4.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.2159 of 2017

7.The direction that the appellant must pay compensation is liable to

be interfered with. The award of the tribunal is set aside. Accordingly, the

civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

                     Index:Yes/No
                     Internet:Yes/No
                     sms                                                            29.03.2022

                     To

                     The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
                     III Court of Small Causes, Chennai.







https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                      CMA No.2159 of 2017

                                  C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J

                                                     sms




                                  C.M.A.No.2159 of 2017
                                                    and
                                  CMP.No.11469 of 2017




                                              29.03.2022






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