Madras High Court
Deepak Karki vs M/S.United India Insurance ... on 5 October, 2023
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.10.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
Civil Revision Petition (PD) No.1829 of 2019
1.Deepak Karki
2.Jyoti Karki Baidawar ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.M/s.United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Manager,
Sreeji Chambers, Mount Road, Bedford Circle,
Coonoor, The Nilgiris.
2.J.Stephen
3.L.Stephen
4.Thakur Prasad Karki
5.Pradeep Kumar Karki … Respondents
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India
praying to set aside the fair and decreetal orders in I.A.No.81 of 2018 in
M.C.O.P.No.13 of 2016 dated 13.03.2019 pending on the file of Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Judge of the Nilgiris,Udhagamandalam
and allow the Civil Revision Petition.
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
For Petitioners : Mr.A.Thameem Mohideen
For Respondent 1 : Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan
For Respondents 2 to 5 : No Appearance
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner praying to
set aside the fair and decreetal orders in I.A.No.81 of 2018 in M.C.O.P.No.13
of 2016 dated 13.03.2019 pending on the file of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal/District Judge of the Nilgiris,Udhagamandalam and allow the Civil
Revision Petition.
2. The case of the petitioners is the first and second petitioners along
with respondents 3 & 4 and their mother Tara Devi Karki went on a
pilgrimage from The Nilgiris to Rameshwaram and Kanniyakumari. On
11.11.2015, when they were travelling back from Kanniyakumari, they met
with an accident on the Tirunelvi National Highway and lost their mother
Tara Devi Kari. In this regard, the petitioners have filed M.C.O.P.No.13 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
2016, before the District Court, The Nilgiris, Uthagamandalam seeking
compensation from the first respondent, who is the insurer of the vehicle.
Against which, the first respondent filed I.A.No.81 of 2018 before the
District Court, The Nilgiris, Uthagamandalam praying not to entertain the
claim petition on the ground that the accident had not occurred within the
jurisdiction of this Court and the petitioners do not reside within the
jurisdiction of this Court.
2.2. In the Court below, the petitioners herein contended that the
husband of the second petitioner viz., Major Suraj Baidawar was an Army
Personal, who is in the Defence Service College and thereby the petitioners 1
& 2 were residing in the official's quarters allotted to him at Gurkha Hill,
Wellington, Coonoor, The Nilgiris District. Thereafter, the Lower Court
observed that though the petitioners 1 & 2 resides at The Nilgiris at the time
of accident, they have not produced any evidence to substantiate the said
claim. and allowed the I.A.No.81 of 2018 filed by the first
respondent/Insurance Company herein with a direction to the petitioners
herein to file a petition before the competent Tribunal having territorial
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
jurisdiction, within two months from the date of a copy of that order.
Challenging the said order dated 13.03.2019, the petitioners have come
forward with the present Civil Revision Petition.
3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the
petitioners has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Malati Sardar Vs., National
Insurance Company Limited and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 43 and
prayed this Court to allow the petition by remitting the matter back to the
Court below.
4. Learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that he has
no objection for remitting the matter back to the Court below for fresh
consideration and trial.
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
6. As relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is pertinen to
extract the relevant portion of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in the case of Malati Sardar Vs., National Insurance
Company Limited and Others reported in (2016) 3 SCC 43 and the same is
reads as follows:
16. The provision in question, in the present case, is a
benevolent provision for the victims of accidents of negligent
driving. The provision for territorial jurisdiction has to be
interpreted consistent with the object of facilitating remedies
for the victims of accidents. Hypertechnical approach in such
matters can hardy be appreciated. There is no bar to a claim
petition being filed at a place where the insurance company,
which is the main contesting party in such cases, has its
business. In such cases, there is no prejudice to any party.
There is no failure of justice. Moreover, in view of categorical
decision of this Court in Mantoo Sarkar, contrary view taken by
the High Court cannot be sustained. The High Court failed to
notice the provision of Section 21 CPC.
7. In view of the above factual matrix of the case and in the light of the
ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the order passed by
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/The District Judge of the Nilgiris,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
Udhagamandalam in I.A.No.81 of 2018 is hereby set aside. The matter is
remitted back to The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/The District
Judge of the Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam for fresh consideration and trial
with a direction to complete the trial/ proceeding as expeditiously as
possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order.
8. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition stands allowed with the
above observation and direction. No costs.
05.10.2023 (vm)
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD,J.
vm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
C.R.P(PD)No.1829 of 2019
05.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
