Madras High Court
Raju Thevar vs Karthikeyan on 10 April, 2023
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 10.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
C.M.A(MD)No.664 of 2020
1. Raju Thevar
2. Pappa
3. Santhanamariammal
4. Priya Karuppasamy ....Appellants/Claimants
Vs.
1.Karthikeyan
2.The Branch Manager,
IFFCO- Tokyo General Insurance
Company Limited,
Door No.138/2, 2nd Floor, LMR Shopping Arcade,
MGM Theatre Opposite Side,
Namakkal District. ... Respondents/ Respondents
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed
by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court),
Sankarankovil, in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2014 on 19.03.2020 and allow this
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
For Appellants : Mr.M.Jothi Basu
For R1 : No Appearance
For R2 : Mr.V.Sakthivel
JUDGMENT
The present appeal has been filed by the claimants challenging the
award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub-Court),
Sankarankovil, in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2014.
2. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased Gurusamy was
driving a two wheeler belonging to the first respondent in the claim
petition. On 28.04.2014, at about 01.00 p.m, when the deceased was
driving the two wheeler, he lost his balance and he fell down from the
vehicle. The deceased had sustained injuries in the back side of the head
and he succumbed to the injury in the Tuticorin Government Hospital.
The claimants have further contended that the deceased was a cleaner
aged about 19 years and he was earning a sum of Rs.9,000/- (Rupees
Nine Thousand only). The claimants have prayed for a sum of
Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs only) as compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
3. The owner of the vehicle had remained ex-parte and the
Insurance Company had filed a counter contending that the deceased had
died out of his own negligence and no offending vehicle was involved in
the said accident. The Insurance Company has further contended that the
deceased was not having valid or effective driving license at the time of
the accident. Hence, they prayed for exonerating the Insurance Company
from the liability.
4. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary
evidence, arrived at a finding that the accident has taken place only due
to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the deceased Gurusamy.
The Tribunal also found that the deceased was not having valid or
effective driving license at the relevant point of time. Therefore, the
claimants are not entitled to receive any compensation from the
Insurance Company. Challenging the said award, the present appeal has
been filed by the claimants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants had contended
that the deceased Gurusamy, was having a Learner's License. It has been
marked as Ex.R2. As per the said Learner's License, it was valid for the
period between 20.08.2013 and 19.02.2014. The accident has taken
place, on 29.04.2014. There are no oral or documentary evidence to
establish that the deceased was not qualified to obtain the permanent
driving license. Therefore, the deceased should be deemed to hold an
effective valid driving license at the time of the accident. The Insurance
Company is liable to satisfy the award.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent had contended that the deceased is the borrower of the
vehicle belonging to the first respondent. Therefore, he entered into the
shoes of owner of the vehicle. Because of negligence on the part of the
owner of the vehicle, he is not entitled to receive any compensation from
the Insurance Company, in which, the vehicle is insured. If the deceased
was having valid driving license, he would be entitled to receive the
compensation under the Personal Accident Coverage. However, in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
present case, the deceased was having a Learner's License only for the
period between August 2013 to February 2014. The accident has taken
place in April 2014. Therefore, on the date when the accident had taken
place, the deceased was not having any valid or effective driving license.
In such an event, the question of invoking the Personal Accident
Coverage also will not arise. Hence, he prayed for sustaining the award
passed by the Tribunal.
7. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on either side.
8. It is an admitted fact that the deceased had borrowed the vehicle
belonging to the first respondent and he had driven the said two wheeler
at the time of accident. It is also admitted fact that he had lost his
balance, fallen down, sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries.
No offending vehicle is involved in the said accident. The legal heirs of
the deceased have filed a claim petition seeking compensation from the
owner of the two wheeler as well as the Insurance Company of the two
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
wheeler, in which, the deceased had travelled. These facts are not in
dispute.
9. In view of the above said fact that the deceased had borrowed
the vehicle from the first respondent who is the owner of the vehicle, he
had entered into the shoes of the owner of the vehicle. Therefore, it is
clear that the owner cannot seek any compensation from his own
Insurance Company either under Section 166 or under Section 163-A of
the Motor Vehicles Act.
10. The owner/borrower of the vehicle will be entitled to seek
compensation from his own Insurance Company only under the Personal
Accident Coverage. The Insurance Company is liable to pay the amount
under the Personal Accident Coverage only if the injured/deceased was
having an effective or valid driving license at the time of accident. In the
present case, admittedly, the deceased was having only a Learner's
License which had expired two months prior to the dare of the accident.
Therefore, the deceased was not having any effective or valid driving
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
license at the time of accident. The Tribunal has properly appreciated the
said facts and had dismissed the claim petition.
11. In view of the above said deliberations, this Court does not
find any merit in the present appeal. Accordingly, this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
10.04.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
ebsi
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/
Sub - Court, Sankarankovil.
2. The Branch Manager,
IFFCO- Tokyo General Insurance
Company Limited,
Door No.138/2, 2nd Floor, LMR Shopping Arcade,
MGM Theatre Opposite Side, Namakkal District.
3.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA(MD).No.664 of 2020
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
ebsi
Judgement made in
C.M.A(MD)No.664 of 2020
10.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
