Dismissed

Divisional Manager v. Sivalingam

Madras HC10 Jun 2019CMA/1414/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by an Insurance Company against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award of Rs.7,000/- for chest injuries sustaininged in 1994. The Court held non-interference was warranted due to the long lapse of time. The appeal is dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed; the appellant is directed to deposit the compensation amount with interest and costs within four weeks.

Divisional Manager Vs Sivalingam — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2019)

m p l

e r

o u

n a l

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

c a t

o n

DATED: 10.06.2019

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶14

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.1414 OF 2003

¶15

¶16

t h e

¶17

Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Hosur ... Appellant/2^nd Respondent

¶18

Sivalingam 2. Suresh (R-2 remained exparte before the Tribunal)

¶19

n a t u r e

¶20

c r

¶21

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree, dated 23.08.1999 made in MACTOP No.67 of 1997 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Special Court, Krishnagiri.

¶22

As against the claim made for a sum of Rs.15,000/- by the injured/claimant, the Tribunal has passed an award for a sum of Rs.7,000/-. Challenging the same, the Insurance Company has filed this Appeal.

¶23

The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant / Insurance Company is that, for the simple injury sustained over the left chest by the claimant, the compensation of Rs.7,000/- is exorbitant and the award itself is unwarranted.

¶24

p r o c e e d

¶25

A perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal would go to show that the claimant has suffered injury over the left chest in respect of which he is stated to have taken treatment at Government Hospital, Krishnagiri. The Tribunal has also taken into consideration the evidence adduced by P.W.2-injured and the wound certificate, which has been marked as Ex.A-5.

¶26

¶27

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

¶28

From the materials placed before the Tribunal, it has chosen to award a sum of Rs.7,000/-, without any break up details. Had there been break up details, it would have been helpful for this Court to find out the justifiability of the award.

¶29

However, the fact remains that the accident had taken place in the year 1994. After a period of two decades and more, it may not be proper to interfere with the quantum of compensation of Rs.7,000/-, especially, when the prices have escalated manifold and there is reduction in the value of money. Having regard to the lapse of time, this Court is not in a position to interfere with the quantum of compensation awarded.

¶30

In view of the above, the Appeal has no merits and therefore, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.

¶31

The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount, as awarded by the Tribunal, along with interests and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the amount to the Savings Bank Account of the injured / claimant, forthwith. No costs.

¶32

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar srk To 1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Special Court, Krishnagiri. Copy To The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras +1cc to Mr.M.B.Gopalan, Advocate, S.R.No.46495

¶33

C.M.A.No.1414 of 2003

¶34

NMI(CO) CS/21/10/2019 CS/25/11/2019

¶35

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

Divisional Manager v. Sivalingam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Manager v. Sivalingam

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

United India Insurance Vs Tmt Dhana Baggiyam

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs M.Raji

The National Insurance Co. Vs G.Ramanujam

Managing Director, Vs v.E.Munusamy

Tn State Transport Corpn. Vs Smt.Ponnukannu

United India Ins.Co.Ltd., Vs Mani