Madras High Court
Chandra vs Jayaraman on 13 October, 2024
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 13.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
C.M.A.No.1616 of 2010
1. Chandra
2. Muniyammal
3. Nanjundan
4. Minor Munirathinam
5. Minor Murugesan
(The petitioners 4 & 5 are rep. By
their Natural Friend, guardian,
the first petitioner)
6. Kuppammal ... Appellants
Vs
1. Jayaraman
2. The Branch Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Branch Office, No.38-C, Bye-pass Road,
Hosur. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed against the Judgment and
decree dated 15.10.2009 in MCOP No.127 of 2005 passed by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Hosur.
For appellants : Mr.R.Pandian
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For respondent : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy R2
R1 - NRN
2
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the Insurance company seeking
enhancement of compensation in the Judgment and decree dated 15.10.2009
in MCOP No.127 of 2005 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal/Sub Court, Hosur.
2. It is the case of the claimant that 23.01.2005 at about 8.30 AM
whe the deceased was driving his cycle towards Rayakottai Anna Statue, at
that time, the lorry TN 41/B 0919, was parked and the deceased
Muniyappan while crossing the lorry, three bags loaded on the lorry fell
down one by one on the deceased, for which, he sustained grievous injuries
and admitted in hospital. As there is no improvement, he died on
29.01.2005. Thereafter, the dependents of the deceased have filed a claim
petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation.
3. In order to prove their claim, the claimants have examined one
witness and marked 4 documents viz., Ex.P1 to Ex.P4. On the side of the
insurance company, one witness was examined and one document was
adduced. After analyzing the evidences, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.4,64,000/- as compensation and ordered pay and recovery method.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the appellants
claimants have come forward with this appeal before this Court.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that the
Tribunal failed to consider that the lorry was parked in the road negligently
and the sugar bags were not tied properly and the accident occurred only
due to negligent of the respondents, ought to have fixed the entire liability
on the second respondent where there was a effective insurance policy at the
time of the accident. The Tribunalfixed entire liability on the first
respondent, ought to have fixed on the insurance company, which needs
interference. Further, the amount awarded under the heads viz., love and
affection, transportation, damages, which are very meagre and this Court
may enhance the same.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent submitted that on the basis of the evidence adduced, the
Tribunal has awarded compensation, which is highly excessive and the
same does not warrant any interference.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the
respondent and also perused the materials available on record before this
Court.
8. The factum of the case are not in dispute. The manner of the
accident is also not in dispute. The only issue that arises for consideration is
with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
various heads, according to the claimant, which is very meagre.
9. It is seen from the claim petition that at the time of incident, the
alleged lorry was not in motion. Hence, it is not an accident. The incident
had happened only due to carelessness of the driver of the lorry. Therefore,
the Tribunal has rightly came to the conclusion that the incident had
happened only due to the carelessness of the lorry driver and hence,
awarded pay and recovery method, which cannot be interfered with. Further,
the order passed by the Tribunal towards compensation to the claimants are
just and fair compensation, which needs no interference.
10. With the above discussion, the civil miscellaneous appeal is
dismissed. No costs. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
confirmed and the appellant is directed to pay compensation as awarded by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the Tribunal to the claimant with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of
petition till the date of realization, within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, recover the same from
the owner of the lorry. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed
to transfer the amount to the bank account of the claimants as apportioned
by the Tribunal through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter.
13.10.2023
Index : Yes/no
Internet : Yes/no
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Hosur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.DHANDAPANI.,J.
rli
13.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
