Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, V.SIVAGNANAM, JJ.
M/s.Reliance General Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
N.Rani – Respondent
C.M.A.Nos.1322 to 1324 of 2020 and C.M.P.Nos.9562, 9564 & 9567 of 2020
Decided on : 07-04-2022
Motor Vehicle Act - Liability of Insurance Company - Rules 236 and 238 of Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - The court found that the deceased and injured claimant travelled only as gratuitous passengers and the owner of the lorry is solely liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal ought not to have granted pay and recover by fixing the liability on the Insurance Company. The claimants are entitled to get compensation from the owner of the Mini Lorry bearing Registration No. TN 5J 5526.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased and the injured claimant were travelling in a Mini Lorry when it capsized due to rash and negligent driving, resulting in deaths and injuries. The claimants sought compensation against the owner of the lorry and its insurer. The Insurance Company contested the claim on the grounds of policy violations and disputed the claims made in the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deceased and injured claimant travelled only as gratuitous passengers and the owner of the lorry is solely liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal ought not to have granted pay and recover by fixing the liability on the Insurance Company. The quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was confirmed as just and fair.
Issues: The main issue was whether the liability fixed on the Insurance Company was sustainable, considering the violation of policy conditions and seating capacity in the Mini Lorry.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if there is any violation of policy conditions or statutory violations, the Tribunal has to scrutinize the policy documents with reference to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules and come to a conclusion whether the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation or not. In this case, the deceased and injured claimant travelled only as gratuitous passengers, and the owner of the lorry is solely liable to pay compensation.
Final Decision: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeals were allowed by setting aside the common award and decree passed, insofar as the fixation liability on the Insurance Company is concerned. The owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization.
JUDGMENT :
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 23.07.2019 made in M.C.O.P.Nos.159, 160 and 161 of 2010 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/II Judge, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
Challenging the award dated 23.07.2019 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ II Judge, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai in M.C.O.P.Nos.159, 160 and 161 of 2010, the Insurance Company has preferred these appeals in C.M.A.Nos.1322, 1323 and 1324 of 2020.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
3. The facts in nutshell are as follows :
(i) On 02.08.2009 at about 4.40 a.m, the deceased and the injured claimant were travelling in a Mini Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 5J 5526 from Koyambedu Market to Thiruporur. When they were nearing Kolapakkam Village, the driver driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the center median and the lorry got capsized. Due to the impact, Krishnaveni and R.Sathya died and M.Buvaneswari sustained injuries.
(ii) Seeking compensation against the owner of the lorry and its insurer M/s.Reliance General Insurance Co., Ltd., the injured claimant filed M.C.O.P.No.159 of 2010 and the legal heirs of the deceased filed M.C.O.P.Nos.160 and 161 of 2010, claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- each.
4. The first respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. The claim petitions were contested by the Insurance Company on various grounds and specifically stated that only three persons are permitted to travel in the Mini Lorry, but at the relevant point of time, ten persons travelled, which is in violation of the policy conditions and also there is no valid permit for the Mini Lorry. That apart, they had disputed the other claims made in the claim petition.
5. To substantiate the case on the side of the claimants, 3 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.3 and 23 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P23. On the side of the Insurance Company, R.W.1 was examined and Exs.R1 and R2 were marked. Ex.C.1 Disability Certificate was marked as Court Document.
6. The Tribunal, after analysing the entire evidence, found that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Mini Lorry. The Tribunal further held that the driver of the lorry allowed to travel persons more than the permissible limit, which is against the policy conditions. Since there is a violation of policy conditions, the Tribunal granted an order to pay and recover. Therefore, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company has to pay the compensation at first instance and thereafter, recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. The break-up details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in each of the M.C.O.Ps are as under :
(i) In MCOP.No.159 of 2010
| S. No. | Heads under which the amount is awarded by the Tribunal | Amount awarded by the Tribunal in Rs. |
| 1. | Pain and Sufferings | 50,000 |
| 2. | Extra Nourishment | 10,000 |
| 3. | Transportation to Hospital | 10,000 |
| 4. | Damages to clothes | 500 |
| 5. | Attender Charges | 1,400 |
| 6. | Medical expenses | 1,09,771 |
| 7. | Future Medical Expenses | 10,000 |
| 8. | Loss of Income | 10,000 |
| 9. | Loss of Amenities | 10,000 |
|
| Total | 2,11,671 |
(ii) In MCOP.No.160 of 2010
| S. No. | Heads under which the amount is awarded by the Tribunal | Amount awarded by the Tribunal in Rs. |
| 1. | Loss of Dependency | 7,92,000 |
| 2. | Loss of Love and Affection | 50,000 |
| 3. | Parental Consortium | 50,000 |
| 4. | Funeral Expenses | 15,000 |
| Total | 9,07,000 |
(iii) In MCOP.No.161 of 2010
| S.No. | Heads under which the amount is awarded by the Tribunal | Amount awarded by the Tribunal in Rs. |
| 1. | Loss of Dependency | 20,40,000 |
| 2. | Loss of Consortium | 40,000 |
| 3. | Loss of L | |
The liability of the Insurance Company is contingent upon the violation of policy conditions or statutory violations, and the court must scrutinize the policy documents with reference to the provisio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the owner of the vehicle alone is liable to pay compensation to a deceased passenger traveling with goods in a commercial vehicle, and no liab....
The main legal point established is that the Insurance Company's liability can be affected by the violation of policy conditions and provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The liability of the insurer under a statutory policy is restricted to indemnify the insured in respect of claims made by third parties and the owner of goods or their authorized representatives who ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the Insurance Company in cases of permit violation and driving license endorsement, based on the interpretation of 'light motor....
The liability of the Insurance Company under the Motor Vehicles Act and the interpretation of driver's license requirements.
The main legal point established is that the insurance company is liable to pay compensation to claimants and recover the same from the owner of the insured vehicle, as per the decision of the Hon’bl....
The insurance company is not bound to indemnify the insurer for the loss or injury caused to a person who had traveled as a passenger in a goods vehicle, as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles A....
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
