Madras High Court
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Krishnathevar on 7 August, 2024
C.M.A.(MD) No.1116 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.08.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.(MD) No.1116 of 2018
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.11336 of 2018
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,
Shan Complex, Mattan Cherry,
Cochin, Kerala State ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Krishnathevar,
S/o.Sangaiah Thevar
2.Nagoor Meeran
S/o.Mohammed Ibrahim ... Respondents
[R1 - dismissed]
Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 praying to set aside the award and decreetal order
passed in M.C.O.P.No.7 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Court), Tenkasi dated 18.12.2023.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Veeranasamy
For R2 : No appearance
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 7
C.M.A.(MD) No.1116 of 2018
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Insurance
Company challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 18.12.2023 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Court),
Tenkasi, in M.C.O.P.No.7 of 2008.
2. The first respondent/claimant filed a claim petition in
M.C.O.P.No.7 of 2008 before the Tribunal stating that while he was
travelling in a Pick-up Van of the second respondent, the driver of the
Van had suddenly applied break in a rash and negligent manner, as a
result of which, the Van capsized and he sustained severe fracture injuries
on his right leg.
3. Before the Tribunal, he had examined himself and Doctor as
P.W.1 and P.W.2 and marked 11 documents as Exs.P1 to P11. On the
side of the appellant, 2 witnesses were examined as R.W.1 and R.W.2 and
5 documents were marked as Exs.R1 to R5.
4. The Tribunal after taking into consideration the oral and
documentary evidences awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,02,000/-
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay the compensation
together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim
petition till the date of realization and costs with a further direction to
recover the same from the owner of the vehicle who is the second
respondent herein.
5. It is seen that this Court by the order dated 26.06.2019 had
directed the appellant to rectify the defects pointed out by the Registry,
(i.e.) to take steps to implead the legal heirs of the deceased first
respondent, failing which, this appeal shall stand automatically dismissed.
Since no steps were taken to implead the legal heirs, this appeal is
dismissed against the first respondent/claimant.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company
submitted that the appellant is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal and the direction of the Tribunal to pay and
recover the compensation from the second respondent owner of the
vehicle when the appellant Insurance Company is not liable to pay the
compensation.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Though Mr.Syed Ali, learned counsel had filed vakalat on behalf
of the second respondent in the S.R. Stage, had entered appearance in the
admission stage of this appeal and his name is printed in the cause list,
today, there is no representation for the second respondent.
8. This Court has carefully considered the submission of the learned
counsel for the appellant Insurance Company.
9. On perusal of the Award and submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellant, this Court finds that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. The Tribunal after taking into
consideration the injury suffered by the first respondent/claimant, the
evidence of P.W.2 Doctor and the Documents namely, Ex.P10 Wound
Certificate and Ex.P11 X-Ray produced on the side of the first
respondent/claimant besides the expenses incurred by the claimant, had
determined the compensation at Rs.1,02,000/-. The evidence referred
above shows that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. Thus, this Court finds that there is no reason to interfere with
the Award. The Award of the Tribunal is confirmed. The legal heirs of
the first respondent are entitled to the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal. The Tribunal had directed the appellant to pay and recover the
compensation amount as the second respondent had violated the policy
conditions by allowing an extra passenger even as per the claim petition.
The said direction is in accordance with law and hence confirmed.
11. It is reported by the learned counsel for the appellant Insurance
Company, the entire compensation together with interest and cost awarded
by the Tribunal has already been deposited. If the same has not been
deposited, the appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
compensation of Rs.1,02,000/- together with at 7.5% per annum from the
date of the claim petition till the date of realization and costs, less any
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
12. On such deposit, the legal heirs of the first respondent are
permitted to withdraw the compensation together with interest and cost,
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
less the amount already withdrawn by the first respondent during his life
time, if any, by filing suitable application before the Tribunal.
12. If there are more than one legal heir for the first respondent, the
Tribunal is directed to apportion the compensation amount among the
legal heirs in the manner known to law.
13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
07.08.2024
Index: Yes/ No
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
JEN
Copy To:
The Principal Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Tenkasi.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
JEN
and
07.08.2024
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
