Allowed

P.Sellammal v. the Managing Director

Madras HC4 Apr 2024CMA/2829/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal order dismissing a compensation claim. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the award, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration upon production of original documents.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was allowed; the impugned award was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

P.Sellammal Vs the Managing Director — Medical Negligence | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04.04.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶6

P.Sellammal ... Appellant

¶7

..Vs..

¶8

The Managing Director Tamilnadu State Express Transport Corporation Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002. ...Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 21.08.2019 made in MCOP No.2937 of 2015, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Special Judge), Chennai.

¶10

For Appellant : Mr.K.Varadha Kamaraj For Respondent : Mr.K.Kathiresan Standing Counsel

¶11

1/6

¶12

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

¶13

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

This appeal has been filed, challenging the award of the Tribunal under which the claim filed by the appellant seeking compensation from the respondent for the injuries sustained by her, as a result of an accident caused by a bus owned by the respondent Corporation has been dismissed on the ground that the appellant/claimant has not produced the originals of all the documents which she relies upon.

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would now submit that

¶17

the appellant is prepared to produce all the original documents, if so required before the Tribunal.

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondent also drew the attention of this

¶19

Court to the impugned Award and would submit that only due to the reason that the appellant/claimant did not produce the originals, the claim came to be dismissed.

¶20

2/6

¶21

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

¶22

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶23

When, the learned counsel for the appellant on instructions would submit that the appellant/claimant is willing to produce all the original documents, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, if the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration to enable the appellant to produce the originals. The legislation being a welfare legislation, the interest of the accident victims should be protected.

¶24

Therefore, after recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant on instructions that the appellant shall produce the originals of all the documents which the appellant/claimant is going to rely upon for the purpose of claiming compensation, the impugned award dated 21.08.2019 passed in M.C.O.P No.2937 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal Special Judge, Chennai, is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the very same Tribunal for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law, by permitting the appellant to produce the originals of all the documents. The Tribunal, on remand shall dispose the MCOP preferably within a period of six months 3/6

¶25

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

¶26

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶27

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. No

¶29

costs.

¶30

04.04.2024

¶31

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order uma

¶32

¶33

1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Principal Special Judge, Chennai.

¶34

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

¶35

4/6

¶36

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

¶37

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶38

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶39

uma

¶40

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶41

5/6

¶42

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

¶43

C.M.A.No.2829 of 2021

¶44

04.04.2024

¶45

6/6

¶46

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

P.Sellammal v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Sellammal v. the Managing Director

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

The Branch Manager Vs Smt.Vanitha

C.Sakkarlappa Vs K.P.Natarajan

V.B.Gopalakrishnan (Died) Vs The New Theatres Carnatic Theatres Pvt.Ltd

Kri.Ganesaamurthy Vs T.R.Periyasamy

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Duraisamy

Velumani Vs Nagaraj