Madras High Court
Dilli vs Abdul Gaffoor on 7 March, 2023
1 C.M.A.No.1548 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN
C.M.A.No.1548 of 2017
Dilli ...Appellant
Versus
1.Abdul Gaffoor
2. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Ranipet,
North Arcot Ambedkar District. ...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order and decreetal
order dated 29.11.1994 made in I.A. No.65 of 1994 in unnumbered MCOP
of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Court),
Villupuram.
For Appellant : Mr. T. Dhanyakumar
For Respondents : Mr. S.Arun Kumar for R2
: No Appearance for R1.
*****
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous appeal has been filed against the order and
decreetal order dated 29.11.1994 made in I.A. No.65 of 1994 in
unnumbered MCOP of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (District Court), Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The case of the appellant is that the petitioner/appellant herein had
filed I.A. No.65 of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(District Court), Villupuram seeking to condone the delay of 177 days for
filing a claim petition seeking for compensation. The Tribunal has
dismissed the same by order dated 29.11.1994 holding that the
petitioner/appellant herein has not paid the cost of Rs.150 to the Insurance
Company/2nd respondent herein as ordered by the Tribunal. Being
aggrieved by the aforesaid dismissal order, the petitioner has filed the
present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal to set aside the same.
3.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
Tribunal failed to note that the cost was actually paid to the counsel for the
2nd respondent on 25.11.1994 and it is the duty of the counsel appearing
for the 2nd respondent to make endorsement or report to the Court that he
received the cost. Further, the Tribunal ought to have allowed the petition
to promote Justice since the claimant lost one of his closet members of his
family in the accident and he is seeking just compensation for the future
livelihood. Hence, he prays to set aside the order dated 29.11.1994 made in
I.A. No.65 of 1994 passed by the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that
the appellant has not filed any document to prove his contention. Hence, the
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5.Heard, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel
for the 2nd respondent as well as perused the materials available on record.
6. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that even though the learned
counsel for the appellant submitted that the cost of Rs.150/- has been paid
to the counsel for the 2nd respondent who appeared before the Tribunal, he
has not filed any supporting document to prove the same.
7. In view of the above, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands
dismissed. No Costs.
07.03.2023
Lbm
Index:Yes/No
Internet: Yes/no
Speaking/Non-Speaking Order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
Lbm
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (District Court), Villupuram.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.1548 of 2017
07.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
