JUDGMENT :

1. On 15.05.2014, past midnight at about 2.30 a.m., on the Main Road of Bannari to Sathyamangalam, near Amman Chamber Privu, Sathyamangalam, the driver of the Maruti Alto Car bearing Registration No: TN 38 AF 3434 lost his control and dashed against a tamarind tree. One Mr.P.Chellamuthu was on the wheels and his wife, Nagarathinam sustained multiple injuries both died on the spot. Rest of the passengers in the car survived.

2. The parents and two minor sons of the deceased Chellamuthu, filed claim petition M.C.O.P.No:1446 of 2014 under Section 166(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, for compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- The parents and two minor sons of the deceased Nagarathinam filed claim petition M.C.O.P.No.1958 of 2014 under Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, for compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. In both the claim petitions, Periyasamy, the owner of the Maruthi Alto car and its insurer M/s IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited, are the respondents.

3. The claim petition resisted by the Insurance Company on the ground that the car under insurance is owned by one Pariyasamy. The policy is a ‘Private Car Package Policy’, for the period between 29.03.2014 and 28.03.2015 and was in currency at the time of accident. As per the RC, the seating capacity for the car is 5 persons. Subject to limits and limitations mentioned in the policy, the insurance company agreed to indemnify the car owner. In case of any violation or breach of terms and conditions mentioned in the policy, the insurance company is entitled to be exonerated from any liability.

4. In this case, the car was driven by the relative of the car owner and caused self accident by hitting a tamarind tree. He is not a paid driver. In fact, he is an employee in the State Transport Corporation. He borrowed the car from his relative and driving the car carrying his wife and other members of his family. Regarding the accident, Sathyamangalam Police registered a case against the driver of the car for rash and negligent driving. The criminal case was later closed as abated.

5. At the time of accident, seven persons were travelling in the car including the owner of the car. In violation of permit, he allowed seven persons to travel, though the vehicle has permission only to carry 5 persons in total. Thus, there is a deliberate violation of the policy condition. The deceased Chellamuthu being the tort-feaser, his dependants have no locus to claim compensation.

6. The Tribunal, on considering the specific defence taken by the Insurance Company repudiating the claims made by the respective petitioners in these two claim petitions, framed the following Points for consideration:-

1.Whether the accident was happened due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the car?

2.Whether the petitioners are entitled to claim compensation? If so, what is the quantum?

3.By whom the compensation has tobe paid? 4.To what relief, the petitioners are entitled?

7. A joint trial was conducted, 3 witnesses for the claimants and one witness for the respondents examined. 26 documents for the claimants and 3 documents for the respondents relied. A common order was passed on 02.01.2019. The operative portion of the award, in respective claim petition reads as under:-

M.C.O.P.No.1446 of 2019:

“2.That the petitioner be and is hereby entitled to get a sum of Rs.19,85,000/- from 1st and 2nd respondents as compensation along with subsequent interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the date of this petition till its realisation.

3.That the compensation amount has to be paid by the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent be and is hereby directed to deposit the said amount into the bank account of this Forum the State Bank of India, Main Branch, Coimbatore in A/c No.35988204194 IFSC Code:SBIN0000827 within one month with c