Madras High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited vs Kandasamy on 21 October, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
CMA.No.2811 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.2811 of 2024 and
C.M.P. No.22792 of 2024
United India Insurance Company Limited,
104-A, Peramanur Main Road,
Peramanur, Salem 636 007. ... Appellant
vs.
1.Kandasamy
2. MSB Services,
No.3, Car Street,
Thiruchengodu Taluk,
Namakkal 637 211 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 14.12.2023 in
M.C.O.P.1295/2019 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub-court No.I, Salem.
For Appellant : Mr. S. Arun Kumar
For Respondents: No appearance
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The present appeal is filed by the United India Insurance
Company Limited, as against the orders in M.C.O.P.1295/2019 on the file
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub-court No.I, Salem.
2. The first respondent/complainant filed the abovesaid Claim
Petition seeking compensation of Rs. 25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained
by him in a road accident that occurred on 08.03.2015.
3. On 08.03.2015, the claimant was riding his two wheeler
bearing Registration No.TN 30 AY 2665 on Ariyanur-Attayampatti Main
Road and a speeding bus bearing Registration Number TN 34 R 1112 hit
his two wheeler as a result of which he fell down and sustained injuries all
over his body. He was immediately rushed to a nearby hospital.
According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of the driver of
the bus bearing Registration Number TN 34 R 1112 was the cause of
the accident and that since the said bus was insured with the present
appellant, they are liable to pay compensation to him.
4. In the Tribunal the the owner of the bus remained absent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and was set ex parte. The appellant insurance company resisted the
claim petition on all the grounds available to the insurer under Section 170
of the Motor Vehicles Act.
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record,
fastened negligence on the part of the driver of the bus bearing
Registration Number TN 34 R 1112 and the claimant in the ratio 70:30
and directed the appellant Insurance Company to pay compensation of
Rs.1,63,420/- (70% of the total compensation of Rs.2,33,457/-) to the
claimant together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date
of the petition till the date of realisation. The Tribunal further held that
the liability of the owner of the offending vehicle and the insurer is joint
and several.
6. Questioning the negligence fastened on the part of the driver
of the bus bearing Registration Number TN 34 R 1112, the appellant, the
United India Insurance Company Limited, Salem, has filed the present
appeal.
7. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is listed before this Court
for admission and the same is decided in the admission stage itself.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. Mr.S. Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant Insurance Company contended that though FIR in Crime
No.109/2015, Attayampatti Police Station, was registered against the
claimant, the Tribunal had wrongly fastened negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus. He therefore, prayed for setting aside the order of the
Tribunal.
9. A perusal of the records shows that FIR was registered
against the claimant and the Investigation officer, Attayampatti Police
Station, after conducting investigation, filed a final report against the
claimant before the Judicial Magistrate IV, Chennai, in STC No.109/2017.
It is needless to state that the criminal case may not be binding on the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Moreover, the claimant examined
himself and two other witnesses to prove negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus. The manner of accident clearly shows that the driver
of the bus was also rash and negligent in driving his vehicle. Therefore,
the Tribunal was right in fastening 70% negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to set
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
aside the orders passed by the Tribunal and therefore, the appeal stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous
petition is closed.
21.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
bga
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
bga
To
1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub-court No.I, Salem.
2. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
C.M.A.No.2811 of 2024 and
21.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
