Partly allowed

The Divisional Manager, v. Firoskhan

Madras HC6 Jan 2022CMA/2737/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in part against the Insurance Company but dismissed it against the Transport Corporation. The auto-owner was directed to deposit Rs. 10,000 with interest towards the creditors of the accident victims.

What did the court decide?

Second Respondent directed to deposit Rs. 10,000 with interest; Appeal allowed against Insurance Company; Appeal dismissed against Transport Corporation.

The Divisional Manager, Vs Firoskhan — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

¶5

C.M.A.No.2737 of 2016

¶6

The Divisional Manager,

¶7

The New India Assurance Company Limited, Fort Station Road, Trichy. ...Appellant/2^nd Respondent

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Firoskhan ...1^st Respondent/Petitioner 2.C.Santhi ...2^nd Respondent/1^st Respondent 3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Kumbakonam. ...3^rd Respondent/3^rd Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Appeal against the Order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Perambalur, dated 31.10.2012 and made in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007.

¶11

Decree: This Appeal coming on for hearing on this day upon perusing the Grounds of Appeal, the Judgment and decree of the Lower Court and the material records in this case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy Advocate for the Appellant and of Mr.D.Venkatachalam Advocate for the third Respondent and notice having been served on the Respondents 1 & 2 and not appeared either in person or through counsel. This Court while allowing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in part and in modification of the award of the tribunal, doth order and decree as follows:

¶12

That the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Perambalur dated 31.10.2012 and made in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007 be and hereby is confirmed.

¶13

That the second Respondent herein/owner of the auto/1^st Respondent be and hereby is directed to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petitions till the date of deposit, along with interest and costs, within a period of eight(8) weeks from the date of

¶14

receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007.

¶15

That on such deposit, being made the tribunal is directed to disburse the same to the claimant in proportionate to the compensation awarded to them.

¶16

That the 1^st Respondent herein/claimant in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007 be and hereby is permitted to withdraw the award amount along with interest and costs as per the apportionment fixed by the tribunal after adjusting the amount, if any already by necessary applications before the tribunal.

¶17

That the Appellant herein/Insurance Company be and hereby is permitted to withdraw the award amount lying in the deposit to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007, if the entire award amount has already been deposited by them.

¶18

That the Appeal is dismissed as against the third Respondent herein/Transport Corporation.

¶19

That there be no order as to costs in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

¶20

-s/dAssistant Registrar

¶21

True Copy

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar vkr

¶23

¶24

1.Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, The Principal District Court, Perambalur.

¶25

Copy To

¶26

1.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.

¶27

+1cc to Mr.D.Venkatachalam, Advocate, S.R.No.979

¶28

DATED:06/01/2022

¶29

DECREE

¶30

C.M.A.No.2737 of 2016

¶31

Allowing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in part is preferred against the Judgment and decree on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, The Principal District Court, Perambalur, dated 31.10.2012 and made in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2007 ect., as stated within.

¶32

VKR(CO) RN(02/05/2022)

The Divisional Manager, v. Firoskhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager, v. Firoskhan

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

A. James Vs Union of India

Yuvaraj Vs Mohanasundaram

A.Prakash Vs Mr.Agnal Mary

The Divisional Manager Vs Alageswari,W/O.Selvaraj

The Divisional Manager Vs Alageswari,W/O.Selvaraj

The Divisional Manager Vs Selvarani