Dismissed

Palaniammal (Died) v. Gunasekar

Madras HC3 Nov 2017CMA(MD)/623/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil miscellaneous appeal was filed under the Motor Vehicles Act to enhance compensation for an accident victim who died, but forensic evidence proved her death was due to cancer, not the accident. The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the Tribunal's award of Rs. 6.48 lakhs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to deposit the entire award amount of Rs. 6,48,944/- with interest at 7.5% per annum.

Palaniammal (Died) Vs Gunasekar — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.11.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

C.M.A(MD)No. 623 of 2017

¶7

Palaniammal(Died)

¶8

Mohanraj

¶9

... Appellant / Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.Gunasekar 2.The Manager, Iffco-Tokia General Insurance Company Ltd., IFFCO Tower, Plot No.3, Sector-29, Gurgaon, Haryana. ... Respondents / Respondents

¶12

PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to allow this appeal and enhance the award amount in M.C.O.P.No.52 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Additional Subordinate Judge), Karur, dated 15.03.2016.

¶13

For Appellant :Mr.K.Suresh Kumar For R1 :No appearance For R2 :Mr.V.Sakthivel

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

This appeal has been filed for enhancement. The claimant got injured in an accident involving an Innova car that belonged to the first respondent and which was insured with the second respondent herein. She died during the pendency of the proceedings before the Tribunal. It was established that the death of the claimant was due to cancer and not on account of the said accident. However the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.6,48,944/-, as compensation to the son of the original claimant.

¶16

2.A look at the break up would show that compensation for pain and sufferings, medical expenses, extra nutritioun, transport expenses and loss of income have been awarded. The appellant has not made out any case for enhancement of the award of the lower Court. The order in M.C.O.P.No.52 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Additional Subordinate Judge), Karur, dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 15.03.2016, is confirmed.

¶17

3.The second respondent insurance company is directed to

¶18

¶19

deposit the entire compensation amount of Rs.6,48,944/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, less the amount already deposited, if any. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same by filing proper application, less the amount already withdrawn by him, if any.

¶20

4.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No Costs.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶23

/True Copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

1.The Additional Subordinate Judge,

¶27

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karur.

¶28

2.The Record Keeper,

¶29

Vernacular Section,

¶30

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Madurai.

COPY TO:

Gunasekar,

S/o.Manickam,

M/s.Engineers Enterprises, No.189, Bharathiyaar Road, Ganapathy, Coimbatore.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.V.SAKTHIVEL Advocate in SR. No. 85384

¶37

+1cc to Mr.K.SURESH KUMAR Advocate in SR. No. 85381 CMR

¶38

JS/KP/SAR.4/18.12.2017/2P-6C

¶39

C.M.A(MD)No. 623 of 2017 03.11.2017

¶40

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

Palaniammal (Died) v. Gunasekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palaniammal (Died) v. Gunasekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director Vs S.Ramasamy

The United India Insurance Co. Vs Kannammal

Chinnasamy, Vs Sellappan

The Divisional Manager, Vs Uma Maheswari

The Managing Director, Vs S.Shanthalakshmi

T. Gopi Vs Tami Nadu State Transport