Allowed

M/S United India Insurance Co. v. M. Karpagam

Madras HC16 Mar 2017CMA/1687/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was allowed. The Court held that the claim relating to a deceased employee-tortfeasor was maintainable under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 instead of the Motor Vehicles Act. Consequently, the awarded compensation was converted and reduced.

What did the court decide?

Compensation reduced to Rs.4,47,740 with interest; apportioned 70:30 between wife and mother; directed to be deposited by insurance company.

M/S United India Insurance Co. Vs M. Karpagam — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶3

M/s.United India Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep. by its Divn. Manager, No.66-68, Gandhi Road, Kanchipuram - 631 501

¶4

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Order and Decreetal Order in MCOP No.364 of 2012 dated 29.02.2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge-II), Kanchipuram

¶5

In the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Vs. Prembai Patel and others [Appeal (Civil) 6476 of 1998 dated 18.04.2005], this Court is of the view that claim for compensation in MCOP No.364 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge-II), Kanchipuram, ought to have been filed under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

¶6

Though, on evaluation of pleadings and evidence, the tribunal, has awarded compensation of Rs.14,16,000/- under various heads by invoking Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, having regard to the fact that the deceased himself was a

¶7

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

¶8

tortfeasor, but at the same time, since he was an employee, we deem it fit to convert the claim, as one under Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and accordingly, compute the quantum of compensation, by applying the schedule provided, under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, as hereunder.

¶9

Income Fixed is : Rs.4,000/-

¶10

Loss of Dependency :(Rs.4,000/- x 221.37 x 50/100)=Rs.4,42,740/Funeral expenses =Rs. 5,000/Total =Rs.4,47,740/-

¶11

In the result, quantum of compensation of Rs.14,16,000/awarded by the tribunal is reduced to Rs.4,47,740/-. There is a reduction of compensation of Rs.9,68,260/-.

¶12

In view of the above, respondents are entitled to compensation of Rs.4,47,740/-, with interest, after one month from the date of accident till the date of deposit of compensation amount at 12% as per Section 4(A) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

¶13

Amount now directed by this Court, is apportioned, in the ratio of 70:30 between wife and mother of the deceased, respectively.

¶14

Award amount is stated to be deposited. Respondents are permitted to seek for disbursement of Rs.4,47,740/-, with interest, as stated supra. Insurance company, is entitled to seek for refund of the balance amount, with interest.

¶15

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, as indicated above. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

ars

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

¶20

¶21

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (District Court No.II), Kanchipuram.

¶22

+1cc to Mr.Prabakaran, Advocate, S.R.No.16774 +1cc to Mr.Rathna Thara, Advocate, S.R.No.16903

¶23

C.M.A.No.1687 of 2016
and
CMP No.12812 of 2016
VSN(CO)
RS(27/03/2017)

¶24

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

M/S United India Insurance Co. v. M. Karpagam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S United India Insurance Co. v. M. Karpagam

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

M/S.Oriental Insurance Company Vs Lakshmi

The Managing Director Vs Tharakeshvari

Sulaiman @ Lalkhan Jawathakan Vs Govindan

The Branch Manager Vs Mrs.Panjavarnam.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Uthra

T. Moorthy Vs M/S Thirupathy Cement Carrier