In this Chinese Miscellaneous Appeal, the Madras High Court dismissed the insurance company's challenge to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award. The court upheld the Tribunal's finding on liability and rejected arguments regarding the quantum of compensation and FIR delay.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal dismissed; no costs awarded.
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.
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.06.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Railway Feeder Road, Virudhunagar. ... Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs. 1.Jayavel ... Respondent/Petitioner 2Karthikeyan ... Respondent/1st Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.259 of 2004, dated 25.10.2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Virudhunagar.
For Appellant : Mr.J.S.Murali For Respondents : No Appearance
1/6
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
JUDGMENT
The present appeal has been filed by the insurance company challenging the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Virudhunagar in M.C.O.P.No.259 of 2004 primarily on the ground of liability and quantum.
2/6
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the rider of the two wheeler. The tribunal relied upon Exhibit P.1/F.I.R, Exhibit P. 4/charge sheet and Exhibit P.5/judgment of the Criminal Court, dated 28.08.2003 and arrived at the above said finding. This Court does not find any reason to interfere in the said finding of the tribunal with regard to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the rider of the two wheeler.
contended that the delay in registering the F.I.R creates suspicion with regard to the manner of accident. However, the tribunal has arrived at a finding that immediately after the accident, the injured claimant has got
3/6
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
admitted in the hospital and priority has to be given only for admission into the hospital and only on a later point of time, F.I.R came to be registered. This Court does not find any reason to disturb the said finding.
costs.
07.06.2023
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
gbg
4/6
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
To
5/6
C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
gbg
Judgment made in C.M.A(MD)No.1301 of 2009
07.06.2023
6/6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's finding on rash and negligent driving was erroneous and required interference.
Whether the compensation award was excessive or unreasonable given the injuries sustained.
Whether the delay in FIR registration warranted disturbing the Tribunal's finding on liability.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
United India Insurance Company Limited
Jayavel
Karthikeyan
R.VIJAYAKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
