Allowed

J.Valli v. S.Senthil Kumar

Madras HC8 Dec 2016CMA/2663/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil miscellaneous appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by a claimant against a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award, the High Court reaffirmed that an insurance company bears initial liability even if the driver lacked a valid licence, directed the insurer to deposit the awarded compensation with interest within four weeks, and allowed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount of Rs.70,700/- with interest at 9.5% p.a. within four weeks.

J.Valli Vs S.Senthil Kumar — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATE : 08.12.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

C.M.A.No.2663 of 2009

¶6

J.Valli. ... Appellant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

S.Senthilkumar

¶9

2.National Insurance Company Ltd., No.751, Anna Salai, III Floor, Chennai-600 002. ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 14.11.2008 in M.C.O.P.No.2615 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, IVth Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

¶11

For Appellant : Mr.Balaji Prasad For R1 : Exparte For R2 : Mr.Baskaran J U D G M E N T

¶12

The appellant in this case is a claimant, who challenges the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.2615 OF 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal [IV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai].

¶13

In a road accident that took place on 20.01.2004, the claimant suffered injuries and seeking compensation, she moved the Tribunal with claim of Rs.3,00,000/- against which Rs.70,700/- was awarded by the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal absolved the second respondent/Insurance Company from liability on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid driving licence at the relevant time. The law is now settled, vide Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. A.Jafer Sadiq & Others [2012(1) TN MAC 394 (DB)]. Based on that authority, the second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to bear the liability at the first instance and then to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount of Rs.70,700/with interest at 9.5% p.a. within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, whereupon the

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

claimant/appellant would be entitled to withdraw the same forthwith.

¶16

The Appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.

¶17

-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
kmi
To
1. National Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.751, Anna Salai, III Floor, Chennai-600 002.
2. The IVth Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
3. The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, High Court, Chennai.
+1 cc to M/s.S.Gangaram prasad Advocate sr 72191
C.M.A.No.2663 of 2009
cp(co)
aa24/01/2017

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

J.Valli v. S.Senthil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Valli v. S.Senthil Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director Vs Mrs.Thangammal

The Oriential Insurance Co. Lt Vs v.Velathal

The Managing Director Vs S.Prakasam

Vs

Manohar Vs Seaman Fisheries Ltd.

Thebranch Manager Vs R.Savithiri