The High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the insurance company challenging the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award. Upholding the Tribunal's finding of negligence, the Court confirmed the compensation of Rs. 1,32,663 along with interest and costs.
Compensation of Rs. 1,32,663/- along with interest and costs is confirmed and directed to be deposited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.07.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.RAMATHILAGAM
C.M.A.No.484 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015
The Branch Manager, M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., The Branch office at, 123-A, No.2 Road, Mayiladuthurai Taluk.
..Appellant/2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.Arokiamary ..1st Respondent/Petitioner 2.S.K.Moorthy ..2nd Respondent/1st Respondent
Prayer:This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree in MCOP. No.78 of 2013, dated 28-02-2014 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai.
For Appellant : Mr.M.B.Gopalan For R1 : Mr.S.Sounthar
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the award dated 28.02.2014 and made in M.C.O.P.No.78 of 2013 , on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai.
The accident occurred on 06.01.2013 at about 8.45 a.m, when the first respondent/claimant was standing in the bus stop at Pukadai Street and at that time, MRS mini bus bearing Registration No.TN 51 S 5989 belonging to the second respondent herein, which was stopped in the bus stop, and While, the first respondent/claimant was getting into the bus, the driver of bus without indication, had run the bus in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, the first respondent/claimant had fallen from the bus and sustained grievous injuries on her right shoulder and she was admitted in the Sri Krishna Hospital, Mayiladuthurai. The first respondent/claimant was given
2
treatment for fracture as an in-patient and surgery was also done. Since the first respondent/claimant was aged about 60, the surgery was not successful. Due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the second respondent's bus, the first respondent/claimant became permanently disabled and lost her earnings and also spent more money for medical expenses. The police has registered a criminal case against the driver of the bus. Hence, the first respondent/claimant filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.78 of 2013 claiming a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation for the injury, disability and other loss sustained by her.
3
is not genuine, but it is created for the purpose of enabling a false claim. The Tribunal failed to appreciate that the date in the hospital intimation had been glaringly corrected clearly to support the false claim and such clear evidence, it taken together, disproves the occurrence alleged or the involvement of the first respondent. The Tribunal stated that the vehicle was falsely implicated by a collusive police complaint.
4
of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.78 of 2013. On such deposit, the first respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the same, after adjusting the amount already withdrawn, if any, by making necessary applications before the Tribunal. Sd/Assistant Registrar(Arbitration)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Additional Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Mayiladuthurai.
Copy to : The Section Officer, V.R.Section,
High Court of Madras,Chennai.
+1 cc to M/s.M.B.Gopalan,Advocate Sr.No. 56088
+1 cc to M/s.S.Sounthar,Advocate Sr.No. 55783
AKM/13.02.2020/4P-5C /
C.M.A.No.484 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the findings of the Tribunal regarding rash and negligent driving by the driver and the quantum of compensation awarded require any modification.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Branch Manager, M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
1.Arokiamary
2.S.K.Moorthy
S. Ramathilagam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
