Dismissed

United India Insurance Co. v. Rathinasamy

Madras HC22 Feb 2021CMA/470/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dealt with an appeal filed by an insurance company against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The insurer argued liability should be denied due to the driver lacking a valid license. The Court dismissed the appeal, noting no evidence existed to challenge the driver's license validity and the tribunal had not adjudicated it as a specific plea.

What did the court decide?

The civil miscellaneous appeal was dismissed. No costs awarded.

United India Insurance Co. Vs Rathinasamy — Insurance | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 22.2.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.470 of 2011

¶6

M.P.No.1 of 2011

¶7

M/s.United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
D.O.II (Ist Floor), 104-A,
Peramanur main road,
Salem 636 007.

¶8

 ...Appellant / 5th Respondent
..Vs..
 ... Respondents 1 to 3/Petitioners

¶9

1.Rathinasamy
2.Janaki
3.Karuppusamy ... Respondents 1 to 3/Petitioners
4.Sakthivel (Driver)
5.G.Maragatham (Owner)
6.A.S.Sathish (Driver)
7.D.Murugesan (Owner)
8.M/s.The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
 5/1/333, Annapoorna Building,
 Ooty Main road, Mettupalayam-641 301
 Coimbatore District.
 (R4 to R7 set Exparte in the
 Lower Court) ... Respondents 4 to 8/
 Respondent-1 to 4 & 6

¶10

Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, against the Judgement and decree dated 9.10.2007 made in
M.C.O.P.No.782 of 2004 on the file of I Additional District
Court (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Coimbatore.

¶11

For Appellant : Mrs.R.Sreevidhya
For Respondent No.1 to 3 : Mr.P.Krishnan
For Respondent No.8 : Mrs.S.R.Sumathy
For Respondent No.4 to 7 : Notice unserved

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

Brief facts of the case is as follows:

¶14

On 24.05.2003 when the deceased Dhanapal repairing the
vehicle bearing registration No.TN-10-A 3103 at Periya
Seeragapadi yerikarai bus stop at Sankagiri – Salem road at the
left side of the road by lying on the ground under the said

¶15

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

¶16

vehicle, a lorry bearing registration No.TDL 7787 driven by the
first respondent in a rash and negligent manner and with over
speed in the same place hit against the vehicle standing in the
jack and dragged the said vehicle to a distance of 50 feet,
thereby caused accident, resulting in the deceased Dhanapal
sustained multiple fatal injuries all over the body and he died
on the way to Salem Government hospital. The legal heirs of the
deceased have filed a claim petition before the tribunal claiming
compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- from the
respondents/Insurance companies and the owner of the vehicles.

¶17

2. The respondents 4 to 7 owners and drivers of the
vehicle remained exparte before the tribunal. On the side of the
claimants, P.W.1 to 3 were examined and Ex.P1 to 10 were marked.
On the side of the respondent, no witness was examined or any
exhibits were marked.

¶18

3. Tribunal, based on the oral and documentary evidence
adduced by both sides, awarded a sum of Rs.3,60,500/- as
compensation to the claimants along with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization.
The tribunal while awarding compensation to the claimants, has
held that appellant/Insurance Company is liable to pay
compensation to the claimants.

¶19

4. Challenging the said award, the appellant/Insurance
Company has filed the present appeal both against the liability
fastened against the Insurance Company as well as the quantum of
compensation awarded by the tribunal.

¶20

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/Insurance Company, the learned counsel appearing for
the respondents/claimants, learned counsel appearing for the 6th
respondent/Insurance Company and perused the materials available
on record.

¶21

6. According to the counsel appearing for the
appellant/Insurance Company, the driver of the insured vehicle
at the time of accident, had no valid driving licence and
therefore, the Insurance company is not liable to pay any
compensation to the claimants. Tribunal without appreciating the
contention raised by the appellant in proper perspective, has
fixed the liability on the appellant/Insurance company.
According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
there is no material has been placed by the claimants before the
tribunal to establish that the driver of the insured vehicle
possessed a valid driving licence. Therefore, the finding of the
tribunal against the Insurance Company is liable to be set aside.
However, there is no dispute raised by the appellant in respect
of the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal.

¶22

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

¶23

7. On a perusal of the award passed by the tribunal,

¶24

there is no such plea raised before the tribunal. The tribunal has discussed negligence aspect on the part of the driver of the vehicle. Further, there is no evidence placed before this Court that the appellant has disproved the validity of the driving licence of the driver of the insured vehicle. Considering at any angle, there is no such issue raised before the tribunal and also, the appellant has not produced any material to prove that the aforesaid ground raised before the tribunal. Therefore, the contention raised by the appellant/Insurance company cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be rejected.

¶25

8. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

¶26

Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

 Assistant Registrar

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

 Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

vaan

¶32

To

¶33

1.The I Additional District Judge,

¶34

(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal)

¶35

Coimbatore.

¶36

2.The Section Officer,

¶37

V.R.Section,

¶38

Madras High Court,Chennai-104.

¶39

+1cc to Mr.P.Krishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.10616 +1cc to M/s.R.Sree Vidhaya, Advocate, S.R.No.10799

¶40

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.470 of 2011
M.P.No.1 of 2011

¶41

KV(CO)

¶42

SB(02/09/2021)

¶43

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

United India Insurance Co. v. Rathinasamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

United India Insurance Co. v. Rathinasamy

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 G.M.,United India Ins., Co., Ltd. Vs Mumtaj Begam

Abusama W/O. Mohamed Vs Mrs Maimoon Beevi

Dhayalan Vs Ramachandran

V.B.Mark Jayaseelan Paul Vs J.Radhakrishnan

E.Vasudevan (Minor) Vs R.Kamaraj

The United India Insurance Co. Vs Manikavasagar