Dismissed

Periasamy v. Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd.

Madras HC21 Sept 2021CRP/1937/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition arising from a motor accident compensation claim, the High Court of Madras dismissed the petitioner's challenge to an ex-parte award. The High Court found that the trial court correctly excused the insurance respondent's delay in filing a counter-affidavit due to non-receipt of the investigation report and refused to interfere with the lower court's decision to dismiss

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petition closed. No costs.

Periasamy Vs Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD)No.1937 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 21.09.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)No.1937 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.15025 of 2021
(Through Video Conference)
Periasamy ...Petitioner
Versus
HDFC Ergo General Insurance
Company Limited,
Divisional Office,
Salem. ...Respondent

¶7

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Fair and Decretal order dated 27.01.2021 made in I.A.No.2 of 2020 in M.C.O.P.No.224 of 2019 on the file of Additional District Court, Hosur.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakaran

¶9

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.2 of 2020 in M.C.O.P.No.224 of 2019 on the file of Additional District

¶12

Court, Hosur dated 27.01.2021.

¶13

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

C.R.P.(PD)No.1937 of 2021

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petition was

¶17

filed in M.C.O.P.No.224 of 2019 claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by the petitioner in a road accident.

¶18

The respondent Insurance Company has not filed any counter and

¶19

therefore, was set as ex-parte. That order was set aside in a petition filed by the

¶20

respondent. Subsequently, counter was not filed and the respondent was again

¶21

set ex-parte and Award was passed. The respondent filed I.A.No.2 of 2020 for

¶22

setting aside the ex-parte order.

¶23

The learned Additional District Judge, Hosur, without considering the

¶24

fact that the respondent was already set ex-parte for not filing the counter, now,

¶25

filed this petition again to set aside the ex-parte order allowed the petition

¶26

without imposing costs. Therefore, the order is liable to be set aside.

¶27

Considering the submissions, it is seen from the affidavit filed in

¶28

support of I.A.No.2 of 2020 that the respondent could not file counter because it

¶29

has not received the investigation report. Therefore, there is a delay of

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶31

Page 2 of 4

¶32

C.R.P.(PD)No.1937 of 2021

¶33

preparation of counter and filing of counter and that resulted in non-filing of the counter and consequently, an ex parte order was passed. Now, the respondents filed a counter along with the petition to set aside the ex parte order.

¶34

The learned Additional District Judge, Hosur has also also taken this

¶35

fact into account at the time of disposing I.A.No.2 of 2020. The respondent is an Institution. This Court finds that there is valid reason for not filing the counter in time that the respondent has not received the investigation report for the preparation of counter. Now, the respondent filed counter along with the ex parte order set aside the petition. Therefore, this Court does not want to interfere with the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Hosur and the

¶36

order of the learned Additional District Judge, Hosur stands confirmed.

¶37

Accordingly, with the above directions, the Civil Revision Petition is

¶38

Dismissed . No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

21.09.2021

¶40

Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order

¶41

sts/jai

¶42

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶43

Page 3 of 4

¶44

C.R.P.(PD)No.1937 of 2021

¶45

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.,

¶46

sts/jai

¶47

To:
The Additional District Judge,
Hosur.

¶48

Order made in
C.R.P.(PD)No. 1937 of 2021

¶49

Dated: 21.09.2021

¶50

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶51

_________ Page 4 of 4_

Periasamy v. Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periasamy v. Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Soundararajan Vs v.Venkatesan

Dr.Senthil Kumar Elangovan Vs Dr.Gnanakalyani

Sasikumar Vs Suganthi

Mr. Alwin Vs Mrs.Sheela

V.P.Shamsudeen(Deceased) Vs the Superintending Engineer

R.Sridharan Vs S.Kalpana