Partly allowed

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vidhu

Madras HC30 Jan 2023CMA/4430/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by an insurance company challenging a motor accident compensation award. The Tribunal had granted the full claimed medical expenses. The Court held that medical expenses already reimbursed by the insurer were not payable again, reducing the total compensation.

What did the court decide?

Award reduced from Rs. 3,03,813/- to Rs. 1,78,368/-; appeal allowed partly.

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Vidhu — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Judgment Reserved on :09.01.2023

¶4

Judgment Pronounced on :30.01.2023

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

¶7

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.25130 of 2019

¶8

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., UIL Building, 4^th Floor, No.4, Esplanade, Chennai – 108. ... Appellant

¶9

vs.

¶10

1.Vidhu 2.K.R.P.Agencies, No.105, Bangalore High Road, Beemanthangal, Sriperumbudur ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 27.08.2018 made in M.C.O.P.No.4991 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

¶12

For Appellant : Mr.S.Arunkumar

¶13

For R1 :Mr.K.Varadhakamaraj For R2 :No appearance

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the award and decree dated 27.08.2018 made in M.C.O.P.No.4991 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

¶19

The Insurance Company is the appellant herein challenging the award granted in M.C.O.P.No.4991 of 2014 on the ground of quantum.

¶20

The factum of the accident, the manner of the accident and

¶21

rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, are not disputed and hence the finding rendered by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed.

¶22

Heard both sides on the point of quantum and perused the materials available on record.

¶23

Mr.S.Arunkumar, learned counsel appearing for the

¶24

appellant/Insurance Company contended that in respect of medical expenses to the tune of Rs.1,28,813/-, he has re-imbursed the same by

¶25

2/6

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶28

way of medi-claim policy as admitted by P.W.1 in the cross-examination and hence he is not entitled for double payment in view of the decision in

¶29

C.M.A.(MD)No.729 of 2017, dated 13.04.2022 in The Manager, TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited, Vs. Kathamuthu and another)

¶30

On a perusal of the evidence of P.W.2 and documentary evidence, namely Ex.P-5 medical bills, it is seen that the injured has spent Rs.1,50,000/-, out of which Rs.1,28,813/- was re-imbursed and hence she restricted her claim Rs.3368/-

¶31

It appears that the Tribunal has taken a view that the

¶32

reimbursement is under a different contract and such a finding by the Tribunal is erroneous in law. The point regarding reimbursement has been settled in the above cited decision and accordingly, the claim petitioners are not entitled for Rs.1,28,813/- and he is entitled for medical reimbursement of Rs.3368/- only. Accordingly, the total compensation is reduced from Rs.3,03,813/- to Rs.1,78,368/-

¶33

(Rs.3,03,813/- - 1,28,813 + Rs.3368/-)=Rs.1,78,368/-)

¶34

3/6

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶37

S. No.	Head	Amount awarded by the Tribunal	A aw thi	mount arded by s Court
1.	For Permanent Disability	Rs .50,000/-	Rs.	50,000/-
2.	Transport to the Hospital	Rs. 5,000/-	Rs.	5,000/-
3.	Extra Nourishment	Rs. 20,000/-	Rs.	20,000/-
4.	Pain and sufferings	Rs. 50,000/-	Rs.	50,000/-
5.	Medical Expenses	Rs.1,28,813/-	Rs.	3,368/-
6.	Future Medical Expenses	Rs. 50,000/-	Rs.	50,000/-
	Total	Rs. 3,03,813/-	Rs. 1,78,	368/-

¶38

In total, the claim Petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,78,368/-(Rupees One lakh seventy eight thousand three hundred and sixty eight only) with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of Petition till date of realisation.

¶39

In fine,

¶40

(i) this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed, reducing the award amount from Rs.3,03,813/- to Rs.1,78,368/-. No Costs. consequently, connected C.M.P is closed.

¶41

(ii) the appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount of Rs.1,78,368/-, with interest and costs before the Tribunal, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

¶42

4/6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶45

of this order, less the amount, if any already deposited.

¶46

(iii) on such deposit being made, claim Petitioners are permitted to withdraw the entire amount with accrued interest and costs, less the award amount, if any, already withdrawn, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal.

¶47

30.01.2023

¶48

nvi Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No nvi To

¶49

1. The M otor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

¶50

2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶51

5/6

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019

¶54

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.,

¶55

nvi

¶56

Judgment in C.M.A.No.4430 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.25130 of 2019

¶57

30.01.2023

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶59

6/6

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vidhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vidhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs M.Gowrishankar

R. Rasambal Vs a.Venkatakrishnan

M/S.United India Insurance Company Limited. Vs Aarathal

United India Insurance Company Ltd, Vs D.Monica Jaraldini

N. Palanisamy Vs K. Ganesamoorthy

E.Chandrasekaran Vs Karnan