Madras High Court
Dhanalaxmi vs R.Ganesh on 22 November, 2023
Author: N.Seshasayee
Bench: N.Seshasayee
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.11.2023
CORAM: JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
1.Dhanalaxmi
2.R.Muruganantham ... Appellants in CMA.237/2022
3.Arumugam ... Appellant in CMA.1826/2022
-Vs-
1.R.Ganesh
2.Cholamandalam Ms.General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
2nd Floor, Dare House,
NSC bose Road,
Chennai – 600 001. ...Respondents in both CMAs
Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of
the M.V.Act, 1988, against the decree and judgment dated 07-12-2018
made in MCOP.No.2150 of 2012 and MCOP.No.1643 of 2012 on the
file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
In both CMAs
For Appellant : Mr.S.Ravikumar
For R1 : No appearance
For R2 : Ms.Harini for Mr.M.B.Gopalan Associates
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
COMMON JUDGMENT
In a road accident that took place on 08.03.2012, a goods carrier carrying
as many as 12 load men met with an accident, in which, one of the load
man died and another injured. As per the charge sheet filed after the
registration of a case in Crime No.109 of 2012 by K4, Anna Nagar PS,
these load men were traveling for procuring vegetables from the
Koyambedu market. Seeking compensation, both the dependents of the
victim who died in the accident and the other injured passenger of the
goods vehicle preferred separate claim petitions in MCOP.No.2150 of
2012 and MCOP.No.1643 of 2012 respectively before the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The claim petitions was contested by the second respondent/insurance
company on the ground that the claimants were gratuitous passengers in
a goods vehicle at the time when the accident took place and there is no
insurance cover. The Tribunal had awarded Rs.13,29,600/- in
MCOP.No.2150 of 2012 (fatal accident case) and Rs.1,09,000/- in
MCOP.No.1643 of 2012 (injury case). However, the Tribunal exonerated
the second respondent/insurance company on the ground that there is no
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
policy cover which enables fastening the liability of the owner of the
vehicle on the insurance company. This is now under challenge at the
instance of the claimants in both the cases.
3.Heard both sides.
4.The entire controversy revolves around construction of Ext.R.5, the
insurance policy and also the registration certificate of the goods carrier,
marked Ext.R6. In terms of Ext.R6, the goods carrier has a seat capacity
of two, including the driver. Therefore, at least one of the two claimants
would be entitled to compensation. The only other issue is whether they
are gratuitous passengers in the goods vehicle but, they are ultimately the
load men traveling to procure the goods.
5.In P.Prakash Vs.Thandivelu and another [2017 (2) TN MAC 34] this
Court had held that even load man who are returning in the Goods
Carrier after unloading the goods, should be treated as load men and not
as gratuitous passengers. Applying the same analogy, both the claimants
in this case must be construed as load men and not as gratuitous
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
passengers.
6.Inasmuch as the second respondent/insurance company is liable to meet
the liability at least for one passenger or load man, this Court considers it
appropriate to direct it to pay the compensation in MCOP.No.2150 of
2012. So far as the other case of injury is concerned, this Court
necessarily needs to direct the claimant to approach the owner of the
vehicle for realizing the compensation.
7.In conclusion, this Court allows CMA.No.237 of 2022 and directs the
second respondent/insurance company to pay or deposit the entire
compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 7.5%,
less the interest payable for 257 days, within a period of six (6) weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the
appellants/claimants in CMA.No.237 of 2022 are permitted to withdraw
the award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount if any,
already withdrawn. No costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
8.So far as CMA.No.1826 of 2022 is concerned, the Award of the
Tribunal is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
22.11.2023
Tsg
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
N.SESHASAYEE, J.,
Tsg
CMA.Nos.237 & 1826 of 2022
22.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
