Disposed

Sekar v. K.Vivekanandan

Madras HC16 Oct 2023CRP(MD)/2662/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition under Article 226, this court directed the Special Judge at Trichy to number and entertain a Motor Accident Claim Petition returned as barred by limitation, pending the Supreme Court's decision on the issue, relying on recent precedents.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Special Judge to take the claim petition on file and proceed in accordance with law, subject to the issue of limitation pending before the Supreme Court.

Sekar Vs K.Vivekanandan — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.10.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶6

Sekar

¶7

... Petitioner/Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.K.Vivekanandan

¶10

2.Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co., Ltd., Bus Plaza, 3^rd floor, 5 G, Lawsons road, Represented by its branch Manager, Police No.VGC 0500859000104 ... Respondents/Respondents

¶11

Prayer : This Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the learned Special Judge for the Motor Accident Claims Cases, Trichy to number the M.C.O.P. Filing No.445 of 2023 and dispose of the same in accordance with law.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani

¶13

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of return dated 01.06.2023, returning the claim petition as barred by limitation.

¶17

The claimant, by alleging that he was injured in an accident occurred on 18.08.2022, has laid the claim petition, claiming compensation.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that FIR came to be registered in Crime No.214 of 2022 on the file of the Jeeyapuram Police Station and that when the claim petition was presented before the jurisdictional Court, the learned Special District Judge, has returned the case as the claim petition is barred by limitation.

¶19

As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in Akshay Raj Vs. Ministry of Law and Justice Legislative Department reported in 2023 Live Law (Ker) 50 , Kerala High Court has observed as follows :

¶20

“ 24. As a fall out of my findings, the impugned orders are set aside, it is held that the provisions of the limitation Act

¶21

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶23

would be applicable for entertaining the petitions for claiming the compensation even beyond the period of six months, for, by taking into consideration, Rule 17 of Annexure XIII framed under Rule 150A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, the limitation to entertain the claim petition cannot be restricted to six (6) months as there is no provision in the Act excluding the applicability of provisions of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. In other words, it is held that the claim petitions, if filed beyond the period of six months cannot be dismissed in limine.”

¶24

No doubt, now the issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme

¶25

Court.

¶26

Recently, a learned Judge of this Court in Malaravan Vs. Praveen Travels Private Limited and others reported in 2023(4) LW 118 , has held that once FIR was lodged within six months, then there is no question of any limitation for laying the claim petition. Since the issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the learned District Judge is directed to take the petition on file, if it is otherwise in order subject to the issue of limitation and proceed with the same in accordance with law.

¶27

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶29

With the above observation and direction, the Civil Revision

¶30

Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶31

16.10.2023

¶32

Note :The Registry is directed to return the original petition, filed along with this revision to the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, retaining a copy of the same.

¶33

NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No das

¶34

¶35

The Special Judge, Motor Accident Claims Cases, Trichy

¶36

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶39

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶40

das

¶41

Order made in C.R.P.(MD)No.2662 of 2023

¶42

Dated : 16.10.2023

¶43

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sekar v. K.Vivekanandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sekar v. K.Vivekanandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Poosari Vs P. Kodangi

Karupayee Vs Indirani

Navaneethakrishnan Vs Deva Industries

S. Kannan Vs S. Hariganesh

A.Sagayamary, Vs Christopher

K.Loga Senthil Vs Sangeetha