Madras High Court
Selvi vs Anil C.Bomb on 23 October, 2024
C.M.A.(MD) No.1124 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.(MD)No.1124 of 2024
1.Selvi,
2.A.Madurai Veeran,
3.Minor A. Ishwarya,
4.Minor A.Maruthamuthu,
5.Chinnaponnu. ... Appellants
(Minors/appellants 3 & 4 represented by their mother/
guardian/first appellant)
vs.
1.Anil C.Bomb,
2.M/s.Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd.,
Through its Manager,
ATP Towers, 12-A, 5th Floor,
Bye-pass road, Madurai – 625 010. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 03.11.2022
in M.C.O.P.No.1868 of 2018 on the file of the Special District Judge
[MACT]/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 6
C.M.A.(MD) No.1124 of 2024
For appellants : Mr.V.Sakthivel
For Respondents
for R1 : No appearance
for R2 : Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan
*****
JUDGMENT
The claimants had preferred this appeal aggrieved by the award of
the Tribunal fixing the liability on the owner by holding that the deceased
was an unauthorised passenger in a goods vehicle of the first
respondent/owner.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal may not be
necessary in view of the order that this Court proposes to pass.
3. It is the case of the appellants/claimants that though the policy of
insurance states that the carrying capacity of the vehicle is zero, the cover
note shows that seating capacity is two; that since the deceased was a
guide to the driver, he is an authorised passenger as per the cover note
bearing No.CCN1308793; and that the insurance company should be
made liable to pay compensation.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. Though notice sent to the owner of the vehicle has been served
and his name printed in the cause list, none has entered appearance.
5. The learned counsel for the insurance company/second
respondent, per contra, submitted that admittedly, the cover note was not
produced before the Tribunal and that a photo copy of the cover note was
only produced before this Court. On instructions, the learned counsel,
further, submitted that the insurance company had not issued any such
cover note from their office and therefore, the burden is on the appellants
to establish that the cover note was issued by the second respondent.
6. This Court has given its careful consideration to the submissions
made on both sides and materials on record.
7. The quantum of compensation is not under challenge. The only
dispute is whether the first respondent or the second respondent should be
made liable to pay the compensation. By virtue of the terms of the policy
of insurance, if the deceased was an authorised passenger, the second
respondent would be liable to pay compensation. Since the appellants had
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
not produced the cover note before the Tribunal, this Court is of the view
that one opportunity can be given to the appellants to establish before the
Tribunal that the cover note was, in fact, issued by the second respondent
for the offending vehicle, wherein the seating capacity was shown as two.
Therefore, this Court deems it fit to remit the matter to the Tribunal for
adjudicating this issue.
8. It is needless to mention that the claimants have to prove the
cover note in the manner known to law. It is open to the second
respondent to raise all the defences that are permissible in law. The
Tribunal may decide the issue based on the evidence without being
influenced any of the observations made by this Court.
9. The Tribunal shall adjudicate this issue as expeditiously as
possible and in any event, not later than three months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. With these observations, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
allowed. No costs.
23.10.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
apd
To
1. The Special District Judge [MACT]/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Madurai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
SUNDER MOHAN,J
apd
23.10.2024
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
