Madras High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Kuppu on 23 September, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
CMA.No.1723 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.1723 of 2024 and
C.M.P.No.13743 of 2024
The Divisional Manager,
M/s.New India Assurance Company Limited,
No.42, Bug Street, Vasavi Buildings,
Second Floor, Tiruvannamalai 606 601,
Tiruvannamalai District. ... Appellant
vs.
1. Kuppu
2. Raman
3. Venkatesan ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award, dated 07.02.2023 in
M.C.O.P.976/2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court, Tiruvannamalai.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam
For R1 and R2 : Mr.S.T.Raja
JUDGMENT
Questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tiruvannamalai in M.C.O.P.976/2022,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the present appeal is filed by the appellant, the New India Assurance
Company Limited, Tiruvannamalai.
2. The claimants / respondents 1 and 2 filed a claim petition
under Section 166 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, in M.C.O.P.976/2022
before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court,
Tiruvannamalai, seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- for the death of
their daughter Rajeswari in a road accident that occurred on 31.07.2019.
3. The brief case of the claimants is as follows :
On 31.07.2019, Rajeswari (deceased) was travalling as a Pillion
rider in a two wheeler bearing Registration number TN 25 BK 8398 on
Tiruvannamalai - Tindivanam main road. When she was nearing
Kilpennathur, the rider of the two wheeler suddenly applied brake to
avoid hitting a dog that crossed the road, as a result of which, Rajeswari
fell down and sustained injuries. She was immediately rushed to
Government Hospital, Tiruvannamalai from where she was referred to
Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai. However, she succumbed
to injuries on 04.08.2019.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. According to the claimants, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the two wheeler bearing Registration number TN 25 BK
8398 was the cause of the accident and that since the owner of the two
wheeler had insured his vehicle with the appellant, the New India
Assurance Company Limited, the owner and the insurer are jointly and
severally liable to pay compensation to them.
5. In the Tribunal, the owner of the two wheeler remained
absent 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.
6. The Tribunal after analysing the evidence on record, fastened
negligence on the part of the rider of the two wheeler bearing Registration
Number TN 25 BK 8398 and directed the second respondent Insurance
Company to pay compensation of Rs.19,34,400/- to the claimants together
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition
till the date of realisation, vide its orders dated 07.02.2023. The Tribunal
also held that the liability of the owner and the insurer is joint and several.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the present appeal is filed by the appellant / the New India
Assurance Company Limited under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
Act.
8. Heard Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, learned counsel for the
appellant, Insurance Company and Mr.S.T.Raja, learned counsel for the
respondents 1 and 2, claimants.
9. Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, learned counsel for the appellant /
Insurance Company contended that the claimants 1 and 2 are the parents
of the deceased Rajeswari who was already married. In the absence of
satisfactory proof that the parents of Rajeswari were depending on her
income, the Tribunal was wrong in awarding compensation to them.
10. Per contra, Mr.S.T.Raja, learned counsel appearing for the
claimants contended that the Tribunal after analysing the evidence on
record, awarded compensation to the claimants and therefore there is no
need for this Court to interfere with the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11. In the instant case, the deceased happened to be a married
lady and her parents are the claimants. Merely because the deceased was
residing with her husband, it cannot be stated that her parents were not
depending on the income of their daughter. In the circumstances, the
Award passed by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with. The Tribunal
has also followed the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another
reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 while awarding compensation to the
claimants.
12. In the result,
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
23.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral citation : Yes / No
vum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
vum
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court,
Tiruvannamalai.
2. The Section Officer, VR Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
C.M.A.No.1723 of 2024 and
23.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
