Madras High Court
Tata Aig General Insurance Company Ltd vs Mariyappan on 8 January, 2024
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.1932 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.01.2024
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.1932 of 2022
TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.,
Peninsula Business, Park Tower,
A, 15th Floor, G.K. Marg,
Lower Parel, Salem. ... Appellant
Vs.
1. Mariyappan
2. M.Thangarasu ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 to set aside the award 15th day of February, 2022 made in
M.C.O.P.No.285 of 2020, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Subordinate Court, (MACT), Dharmapuri.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Vinod
For R1 & R2 : No appearance
Amicus Curiae : Dr.B.Ramaswamy
(Respondents)
JUDGEMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Insurance
Company, challenging the negligence as well as the quantum of
compensation.
2. In the present case, the contention of the appellant/Insurance
Company is that the rider of the Royal Enfield motor cycle was riding his
vehicle behind the Ashok Leyland Dost, who drove the vehicle in a rash and
negligent manner and suddenly turned towards the right side of the road
which led to the occurrence of the accident.
3. Dr.B.Ramaswamy, Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondents
would submit that as per the report, the rider of the two wheeler driven the
vehicle carefully by taking all the precautionary measures, this accident
would have been avoided. Further, he contented that only due to rash and
negligent driving by the rider of the two wheeler, this accident had occurred.
4. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions made by the learned Amicus Curiae, this Court is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
of the considered view that while the four wheeler was turning to right, the
rider of the two wheeler has to take precautionary measure and ought to
have ridden the vehicle slowly and carefully. Since, he drove the vehicle in
a rash and negligent manner, the accident was occurred. Therefore, this
Court agrees that there is rash and negligence on the part of the rider of the
two wheeler. Hence, this Court is inclined to fasten the entire liability on the
rider of the two wheeler and confirm the order of the Court below in this
aspect.
5. With regard to the challenge to the quantum of compensation
is concerned, the Tribunal fixed the notional income at Rs.6,000/- per month
and the Medical Board fixed the functional disability at 61% and the
Tribunal has taken the entire disability at 61% and awarded the
compensation.
6. The learned Amicus Curiae appering for the respondents would
submit that the accident was occurred in the year 2018 and the Tribunal
fixed notional income at Rs.6,000/- per month, which is on the lower side.
Therefore, he contented to fix the notional income at minimum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rs.15,000/- per month. He would further submit that the functional
disability may be taken as 50% instead of 61% while fixing the notional
income at Rs.15,000/-.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company
would fairly submit that in the event of fixing Rs.15,000/- as notional
income, 61% functional disability fixed by the Tribunal may be reduced to
50%, by which, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal would become
reasonable and cannot be construed as higher side. Therefore, he fairly
submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal may be
confirmed.
8. At this juncture, Dr.B.Ramaswamy, learned Amicus Curiae
appearing for the respondent is reluctant to accept the submission made by
the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance company, however, he fairly
submitted that since the appeal was filed by the Insurance Company, he
agreed and urged this Court to confirm the award passed by the Tribunal.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
submissions made by the learned Amicus Curaie and the learned counsel for
the appellant/Insurance Company, this Court is inclined to confirm the
award passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the appellant/Insurance Company
is directed to deposit the amount awarded by the Tribunal to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.285 of 2020, Special Subordinate Court, Dharmapuri, along
with interest from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs
as awarded by the Tribunal, less the amount, if any already deposited,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. Upon such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to
transfer the entire amount to the respective bank accounts, by way of RTGS,
within a period of three weeks from the deposit or from the date of receipt
of the Bank details obtained from the claimants or application for
withdrawal from the claimant, whichever is later.
10. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellanous Appeal is dismissed. No
costs.
This Court places its appreciation towards the assistance rendered
by DR.B.Ramaswamy, Amicus Curaie in this matter.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
08.01.2024
Index : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
jd
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Subordinate Court, (MACT), Dharmapuri.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,
jd
08.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
