Dismissed

M. Pradeep Arumugam, v. Jansirani

Madras HC13 Apr 2023CRP(MD)/34/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil revision petition filed to set aside an order dismissing an application to reopen a motor accident claim case. The High Court held that the tribunal did not commit any error, the claimants are entitled to compensation, and the inter se dispute between parties must be resolved separately at law.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed with directions to close the connected Miscellaneous Petition.

M. Pradeep Arumugam, Vs Jansirani — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 13.04.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023 and

¶7

C.M.P(MD).No.211 of 2023

¶8

M.Pradeep Arumugam ... Petitioner/Petitioner/1^st Respondent

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Jansirani 2.Jasmine Sebakumar

¶11

3.Jenifar

¶12

4.Minor.Rooth Arul Jeyanthi (minor rep., by his mother/guardian R1)

¶13

.. Respondents/Respondents/Claimants

¶14

5.Divisional Manager, Oriental General Insurance Company, D.No.39/40, Simmakkal, Madurai. ... Respondent/Respondent/2^nd Respondent

¶15

6.Pavithran ... Respondents/Respondents/3^rd respondent

¶16

PRAYER:- This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records in I.A.No.1070 of 2022 in MCOP.No.748 of 2013 dated 01.12.2022 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge (Communal Clash Cases cum Motor Accident Claim Tribunal), Madurai and set aside the same.

¶17

For petitioner : Mr.J.Gunaseelanuthiah For R1 to R4 & R5 : No appearance For R6 : Mr.K.Dinesh

¶18

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

¶19

1/7

¶20

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is the first respondent in M.C.O.P.No.748 of 2013 filed by the respondents 1 to 4 herein before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madurai. In the said proceedings, subsequently the sixth respondent herein was impleaded as third respondent. At the stage of argument, the petitioner herein, who is the first respondent/owner of the vehicle as per the registration certificate, filed an application to reopen the case. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dismissed the said application filed by the petitioner with the following observation :

¶23

“fle;j 03.12.2011 md;W 4k; vjph;kDjhuuhd

¶24

fhkhl;rp fhh;j;jpf; vd;gth; TN 38 AU 4144 vd;w ,Urf;fu thfdj;ij Xl;br; nrd;w NghJ rhiyapy; ele;J nrd;w uhgh;l; uj;jpdFkhh; kPJ Nkhjp tpgj;J Vw;gLj;jpajpy; uhgh;l; uj;jpdFkhh; ,we;J tpl;lhh;. vdNt ,og;gPL toq;ff; Nfhhpa tof;fpy; gjpT rhd;wpjopy; chpikahsh; vd Fwpg;gplg;gl;Ls;s 1k; vjph;kDjhuUk; mjd; fhg;gPl;L epWtdkhd 2k; vjph;kDjhuUk; jug;gpduhf Nrh;f;fg;gl;Ls;sdh;. gpd;dpl;L Nkw;gb thfdj;ij fpiuak; ngw;wjhf $wg;gLk; 3k; vjph;kDjhuh; kw;Wk; thfdj;ij Xl;br; nrd;w fhkhl;rp fhh;j;jpf; 4k; vjph;kDjhuuhf tof;fpy; Nrh;f;fg;gl;Ls;sdh;. 4k; vjph;kDjhuh; mry; tof;fpy; xUjug;ghfpAs;shh;. ,e;epiyapy; 1k; vjph;kDjhuh; jug;gpy; ,k;kD jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ.

¶25

5)mry; tof;fpy; jPh;khdpf;fg;gl Ntz;ba gpur;ridahdJ 03.11.2011k; Njjp ele;j tpgj;J TN 38 AU 4144 thfdj;jhy; Vw;gl;ljh? ,we;jtUf;F ahh; ,og;gPL

¶26

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

¶27

2/7

¶28

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶29

nrYj;j flikg;gl;lth; vd;gJ kl;LNkahFk;. ,U rf;fu thfdj;jpd; chpikahsh; 1k; vjph;kDjhuuh? my;yJ 3k; vjph;kDjhuuh? vd;gJ mry; tof;fpy; ,iz epiyahf jPh;T fhz Ntz;ba gpur;ridahFk;. ,k;kDtpy; 4k; vjph;kDjhuuhd fhkhl;rp fhh;j;jpf; vd;gth; mry; tof;fpy; jug;gpduhf Nrh;f;fg;gLtjw;F Kd;ghfNt 2k; vjph;kDjhuh; jug;gpy; v.k.rh.3 Mf tprhhpf;fg;gl;Ls;shh;. mjd; gpd;dpl;L tof;fpd; jug;gpduhf Nrh;f;fg;gl;l NghjpYk; mtiu kPz;Lk; mioj;J tprhuiz nra;a kDjhuh; kw;Wk; 6k; vjph;kDjhuh; jug;gpy; ahnjhU Kaw;rpAk; Nkw;nfhs;sg;gltpy;iy. fhty; Jiwapdh; Fw;w tof;F rk;ge;jkhf Gydha;T Nkw;nfhz;l NghJ kDjhuh;> fhkhl;rp fhh;j;jpf; kw;Wk; 6k; vjph;kDjhuh; / 3k; vjph;kDjhuiuAk; fhty; epiyaj;jpy; mioj;J tprhhpj;jdh; vd;gjpy; g+ry; VJkpy;iy. Mdhy; fhty; epiyaj;jpy; gtpj;ud; vd;gth; xg;Gjy; thf;F%yk; vOjp nfhLj;jhh; vd;gij nghWj;J ve;j MtzKk; ePjpkd;wj;jpy; Kd;dplg;gltpy;iy. ,t;tof;fpy; tprhhpf;fg;gl;l v.k.rh.7 fhpNkL fhty; epiyaj;jpd; epiya nghWg;G mYtyh; Mthh;. Mdhy; mth; jdJ tof;F tprhuiz Nfhg;gpy; Nkw;gb gtpj;ud; vd;gtUila xg;Gjy; thf;F%yk; VJkpy;iy vd;Wk; Mdhy; Nkw;gb gtpj;ud; vd;gtiu Ma;thsh; tprhhpj;jNghJ F.tp.K.r. gphpT 161 (3)d; gbahd thf;F%yk; ngwg;gl;ljhf rhl;rpakspj;Js;shh;. vdNt Nkw;gb gtpj;ud;

¶30

vd;gtUila ifnahg;gk; xg;gplg;gl Ntz;Lkhdhy; gpur;ridf;Fhpa Mtzk; Kd;dplg;gl;L me;j Mtzj;jpy; cs;s ifnahg;gk; gtpj;ud; vd;gtuhy; kWf;fg;gl;L ,Ue;jhy; kl;LNk Nkw;gb thf;F%yj;jpy; cs;s ifnahg;gj;ij xg;gpLtjw;F jFe;j NtW Mtzq;fis nfhz;L njspTgLj;jyhk;. Mdhy; ,q;F

¶31

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

¶32

3/7

¶33

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶34

gpur;ridf;Fhpa Mtzk; VJk; Kd;dplg;glhkNyNa gtpj;ud; gbj;j fyrypq;fk; gy;fiyf;fofj;jpypUe;J Mtzq;fis jUtpf;f NfhUtJ gadw;wjhFk;. NkYk; ve;j fy;tp epiyaj;jpy; ve;j fy;tp Mz;by; vd;d vd;d Mtzq;fs; jUtpf;fg;gl Ntz;Lk; vd;w tpz;zg;gk; VJk; jdpNa jhf;fy; nra;ag;gltpy;iy. cah;ePjpkd;wk; Fwpj;j fhy tiuaiwf;Fs; tof;fpd; tprhuizia Kbf;f cj;jutpl;Ls;s epiyapy; kDjhuh; xt;nthU KiwAk; rhl;rpfis tprhhpg;gjw;Fk; gpd;dh; ntt;NtW gpur;rid vOg;gpAk; gpd;dpl;L eltbf;if Nkw;nfhs;s ,Ug;gjhfTk; $WtJ tPz; fhy jhkjj;ij Vw;gLj;Jk; Nehf;fkhf cs;sJ. ,e;epiyapy; jw;NghJ Mtzq;fis jUtpf;f NfhUk; kD VJk; jhf;fy; nra;ahky; kW jpwT nra;a kD jhf;fy; nra;Js;s epiyapy; ,k;kD mDkjpf;fg;gl;lhy; NkYk; fhy jhkjk; Vw;gLk; tha;g;G cs;sJ. vdNt tPz; fhy jhkjj;ij Vw;gLj;Jk; Nehf;fj;NjhL jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;s ,k;kD js;Sgb nra;ag;gLfpwJ.

¶35

Kbthf kD js;Sgb nra;ag;gLfpwJ. “

¶36

The specific case of the petitioner before this Court is the tribunal

¶37

committed an error. It is submitted that the tribunal failed to consider the deposition of R.W.3 (Kamatchi Karthick) and that the sixth respondent herein who was examined as R.W.8, wherein at the time of deposition, it has been stated as under:

¶38

“ I have not given any evidence before police and not put any signature before police. It is not true he has given statement before

¶39

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

¶40

4/7

¶41

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶42

concern police station along with Kamatchi Karthick and put signature in statement. But he refused his signature and statement which was given before concern police station. That documents are marked before concern Tribunal by police department. That point not consider by the trial Court. “

¶43

It is submitted that the sixth respondent herein has not given any statement before the concerned police station along with the said Kamatchi Karthick. I find that there is no merits in the present civil revision petition. The claimants (respondents 1 to 4 herein) had filed the claim petition in the year 2013. They cannot be denied the right to receive compensation, if they are otherwise entitled to receive compensation. As far as inter se dispute between the petitioner and the sixth respondent herein is concerned, it is open for the petitioner to workout his remedy available in accordance with law.

¶44

In result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶45

13.04.2023

¶46

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Rmk

¶47

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

¶48

5/7

¶49

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶50

¶51

1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Communal Clash Cases Court, Madurai

¶52

2.The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶53

C.SARAVANAN,J.

¶54

Rmk

¶55

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶56

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

¶57

6/7

¶58

C.R.P(MD).No.34 of 2023

¶59

13.04.2023

¶60

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

¶61

7/7

M. Pradeep Arumugam, v. Jansirani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Pradeep Arumugam, v. Jansirani

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

R. Guruvammal alias Gurumeena, Vs C. Kannan

C. Jesukahan Vs Jerina Mari Victoriya

Malathi, Vs Esakkipandi

Benjamin, Vs Thankamony

R.v.R.Sendrayan Vs the Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd.

S.S.M.Habeeb Thambi Maraikayar Vs S.S.M.Noor Mohamed (died)