JUDGMENT :

(The case has been heard through video conference)

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the award dated 02.08.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.1030 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Poonamallee.

2. The appellant is the 2nd respondent in M.C.O.P.No.1030 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Poonamallee. The first respondent filed the said claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 23.03.2009.

3. According to the 1st respondent/claimant, on 23.03.2009 at about 19.00 hours, when he was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN- 09-AM-7447 belonging to the 2nd respondent on Kundrathur to Pallavaram Main Road and while going near Karaimanagar, met with an accident. Due to the impact, the 1st respondent sustained multiple grievous injuries. The 2nd respondent is the owner and the appellant is the insurer of the vehicle.

4. The 2nd respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

5. The appellant/Insurance Company filed counter statement that the appellant has not received any claim from the 2nd respondent nor the 2nd respondent chosen to appear before Tribunal. It is reliably learnt from the police records as well as from investigation report that the 1st respondent had met with an accident while riding the motorcycle when his vehicle dashed against the another motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN-22-Q-2751 which was coming from the opposite direction. But, the 1st respondent has filed the above claim petition against his own vehicle's insurance company which he purchased from the 2nd respondent. As a tort-feasor, the claimant cannot maintain the above claim against 1st respondent against his own vehicle. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1 and Dr.V.R.Subramaniam, was examined as P.W.2 and marked nine documents as Exs.P1 to P9. On the side of the appellant/Insurance Company, one P.Maharajan, was examined as R.W.1 and four documents were marked as Exs.R1 to R4.

7. The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent riding by the rider of the motorcycle belonging to the second respondent and directed the appellant-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.4,50,577/- as compensation to the first respondent/claimant.

8. Challenging the award of the Tribunal dated 02.08.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.1030 of 2010, the appellant-Insurance Company has come out with the present appeal.

9. Mr.P.Sankaranarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted his arguments. As per his submission, the injured victim is claimant before the Tribunal. The claim petition was filed under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicle Act. As per the claim petition, that on 23.03.2009, by around 19.00 hours, the claimant was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-09-AM-7447, belonging to the 2nd respondent cautiously and slowly on the safer side of the Kundrathur to Pallavaram Main Road and while going near Karaima Nagar, involved in the accident. The injured was immediately taken to Deepam Hospital, then to Kamatchi Hospital, and later he was admitted as inpatient at Kumaran Hospital. The 1st respondent is the rider of the motorcycle, 2nd respondent is the owner and the appellant is the insurer of the said two wheeler. The learned Tribunal had fastened the liability on the appellant/Insurance Company. The appellant/Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. The award by the Tribunal is to be considered made against the rider of the two wheeler.

10. For the injuries suffered by the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.1030 of 2010, the claimant is entitled only the amount under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicle Act. As per Insurance Policy, the driver cum owner of the vehicle alone is protected and f