Back
IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
The Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd., Vellore - Appellant
Versus
Karthikeyan & Others - Respondent
C.M.A. Nos. 1019, 2123, 2124 of 2018 & C.M.P. Nos. 8281, 16523 & 16524 of 2018
Decided On : 09-03-2021
Motor Vehicles Act - Liability of Multiple Parties - Section 173 - M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2015, M.C.O.P.No.244 of 2015, M.C.O.P.No.247 of 2015 - The judgment discusses the liability of multiple parties in a motor vehicle accident and the application of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The court analyzed the evidence, including the F.I.R, investigation report, and witness testimonies, to determine the contributory negligence of the parties involved. The judgment highlights the importance of producing relevant evidence such as insurance particulars and driving license, and the impact of contributory negligence on the compensation awarded.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a motor vehicle accident where the occupants of two cars sustained injuries. The claimants, occupants of the Maruti Esteem car, filed claim petitions against the owner of the Tata Indica car and its insurer for compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accident resulted from the contributory negligence of both the Maruti Esteem car driver and the Tata Indica car driver. It held that the claimants were entitled to 50% compensation from the appellant (Insurance Company) and the remaining 50% from the owner of the Maruti Esteem car.
Issues: The main issue was the determination of liability in a motor vehicle accident involving multiple parties. The court also addressed the admissibility of evidence and the impact of contributory negligence on compensation claims.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the contributory negligence of the parties involved, as evidenced by the F.I.R, investigation report, and witness testimonies. It emphasized the need for relevant evidence such as insurance particulars and driving license to establish liability.
Final Decision: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeals were partly allowed, confirming the quantum of compensation awarded in all cases. The liability to pay by the appellant was altered, directing the appellant to pay 50% of the award amount, with the remaining 50% to be recovered from the owner of the Maruti Esteem car.
JUDGMENT :
Prayer in C.M.A.No.1019 of 2018: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.247 of 2015, dated 24.04.2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Judge), at Tiruvannamalai.
C.M.A.No.2123 of 2018: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2015, dated 24.04.2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Judge), at Tiruvannamalai.
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2018: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.244 of 2015, dated 24.04.2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Judge), at Tiruvannamalai.
1. The three Civil Miscellaneous Appeals under consideration are preferred by the Insurance Company against the award passed by the Tribunal in the joint trial of M.C.O.P Nos.243, 244 and 247 of 2015. In these appeals, the award is assailed both on liability as well as the quantum of compensation fixed by the tribunal.
2. The brief facts of the case:- On 21.06.2014, at about 2.50 p.m, on the Polur-Chengam Main Road, near Pudur Mariamman Koil, a Maruti Esteem car bearing registration No. KA-03- P-5866 proceeding from Bangalore towards Thiruvannamalai and a Tata Indica car bearing registration No TN-25-K-9898 proceedings from Thiruvannamalai to Chengam dashed against each other. The occupants in both the vehicles sustained injuries. The first information was recorded based on the statement given by Ramakrishnan, the driver-cum-owner of the Tata Indica car, when he was at the hospital taking treatment for his injuries.
3. The F.I.R marked as Ex.P-1, states that, when the defacto complainant Ramakrishnan was returning from Thirvannamalai along with his wife to his home at Chengam in his Tata India car, the driver of the Maruti Esteem coming from the opposite direction rash and negligently dashed on the left side of his car. In the accident, he and his wife sustained injuries and taken to Chengam Government Hospital for treatment. Based on his statement, attributing rash and negligence against the Maruti Esteem car driver, a case was registered against the driver of the Maruti Esteem car for offences under Sections 279 and 337 of I.P.C under Crime No.119/2014.
4. The claimants are the driver and occupants of the Maruti Esteem car bearing registration No.KA-03-P-5866. For the injuries they sustained in the said accident, they preferred claim petition against the owner of the Tata Indica car and its insurer.
M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2015: by Dhamodaran, the owner-cum-driver of the Maruti Esteem car. Claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000 as compensation.
M.C.O.P.No.244 of 2015: by Amudha W/o.Dhamodaran. Claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000 as compensation.
M.C.O.P.No.247 of 2015: by Karthikeyan S/o.Dhamodaran. Claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000 as compensation.
5. In all these claim petitions, the claimants blamed rash and negligence of the Tata Indica driver, for the cause of accident. It is averred that, without giving horn, he drove the car haphazard and hit the maruti esteem car head on.
6. The Insurance Company contested the claim on the ground that, the driver of the Maruti car was the tort-feasor. The F.I.R was registered against him. The claimants have not produced the Insurance particulars of their vehicle. The compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant. During the trial, they produced the private investigation report revealing that the Dhamodaran the driver of the Maruti car had no valid driving license and the car was not duly insured.
7. After trial, on considering the evidence placed before it, the Tribunal passed award as below for each of the claimants.
In M.C.O.P.No.243
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
