Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 11493 Mad
Judgement Date : 30 August, 2023
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:30.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.4784 of 2022
United India Insurance Company Limited,
Shiva Medical 'B' upstair,
Calicut Road, Gudalur,
The Nilgris District – 643 212. ... Appellant
Versus
1.A.Ramasamy
2.T.Dinesh
3.T.Thanajayam ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 04.01.2021
passed in M.C.O.P.No.231 of 2019, on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, III Additional District Court, Special Subordinate
Court, Erode.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Chandran
For Respondents : No Appearance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company
challenging the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in
M.C.O.P.No.231 of 2019, dated 04.01.2021.
2.The claim petition was filed stating that on 12.09.2018 at about
2.00 a.m., while the 1st respondent was travelling in lorry bearing Regn
No.TN-59-A-9947 as the owner of the goods from Erumadu to Ooty, the
driver of the said lorry drove the same in a rash and negligent manner ,
dashed against the side wall of the road; that due to the said accident, the
1st respondent sustained multiple grievous injuries and that thus, the 1 st
respondent was entitled for compensation.
3.The appellants 2 and 3/driver and owner of the lorry remained
ex-parte before the Tribunal.
4.The appellant/Insurance Company filed a counter denying all the
averments made in the claim petition and stated that since the vehicle
from the opposite direction came in wrong side, the driver of the lorry in
order to avoid the accident turned it to the left side, which hit on the wall;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
that the 1st respondent travelled as gratuitous passenger in the lorry and
hence, the appellant was not liable to pay any compensation to the 1st
respondent; that in any case, the compensation claimed was excessive
and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined two witnesses
and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19 on his side. The appellant had not
examined any witness or marked any document
6.The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary
evidence, directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.5,75,000/- as
compensation to the 1st respondent.
7.Aggrieved over the award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant
filed the present appeal challenging the findings of the Tribunal with
respect to the negligence aspect.
8.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the 1st
respondent was gratuitous passenger and the appellant is not liable to pay
any compensation. The learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
that as regards quantum of compensation, there is no infirmity in the
award of the Tribunal.
9.Though notice was served on the respondents, none entered
appearance on behalf of them.
10.The only question involved in the instant appeal is whether the
1st respondent herein was a gratuitous passenger and hence, he is not
entitled to compensation?
11.On perusal of records, it is seen that the Tribunal had held that
the 1st respondent was not an unauthorised passenger and travelled in
lorry along with goods belonging to him. P.W.1 had deposed before the
Tribunal stating the above facts. The appellant had not established before
the Tribunal that the 1st respondent was a gratuitous passenger. In the
absence of any evidence to substantiate their claim, this Court finds no
infirmity in the finding of the Tribunal holding that the appellant is liable
to pay compensation. Since there is no challenge with regard to quantum
of compensation, the award of the Tribunal is confirmed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
12.With the above observations, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is dismissed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is confirmed
together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of deposit. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount already
deposited, if any, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of a
receipt of copy of this Judgment. On such deposit, the 1 st respondent is
permitted to withdraw the entire award amount along with interest and
costs, less the amount already withdrawn, if any. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
30.08.2023
rst
Index: Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To:
1.The Motor Vehicle Accident Tribunal, III Additional District Court, Special Subordinate Court, Erode.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
rst
C.M.A.No.672 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.4784 of 2022
30.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!