SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 96916

MADRAS HIGH COURT
P.RAMESH(DIED)1.SARITHA, – Appellant
Versus
P.KALIYAMMAL – Respondent
CMA 2181 2021



C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on

16.03.2023

Pronounced on

06.04.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

AND

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN

THILAKAVADI,J.

C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

P.Ramesh (Died)

1. Saritha

2. Minor Gowsik

3. Minor Sundaresan

(Minors rep. By their next friend

Guradian/Mother/Saritha)

4.Perumal

…Appellants

Vs.

1.P.Kaliyammal

2.The Divisional Manager,

Oriental Insurance Company Limited,

KVA Complex, 90-A, Thuraiyur Raod,

Page 1 of 14

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

C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

Namakkal

…Respondents

Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of

Motor Vehicles Act,1988, against the award dated 06.02.2020 made in

M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

(Chief Judicial Magistrate) Namakkal.

For Appellant

: Mr.M.Lokesh

For R1

: ex-parte

For R2

: Mr. K.Vinod

for M/s.Elveera Ravindran

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI,J.)

The appellant has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal as against the

award dated 06.02.2020 made in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2015 on the file of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate)Namakkal.

Page 2 of 14

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

C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

2.Aggrieved by the insufficiency of compensation awarded by the Tribunal,

the claimants have brought forth the above said civil miscellaneous appeal.

3.In the impugned award the Tribunal directed the respondents to pay a sum

of Rs.1,74,300/- as compensation together with an interest at the rate of 7.5% per

annum from the date of claim till realization and costs for the injuries sustained by

the 1st petitioner-P.Ramesh who met with an accident on 02.12.2014 at about 2.

p.m.

4.The facts of the case is that on 02.12.2014 at about 2.p.m the 1st petitioner-

Ramesh was travelling as a passenger in the bus bearing Reg. No. TN-28-P-7330

to Sabarimala. In the Erumeli to pamba road when the bus was nearing the south of

village, the driver of the bus drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner due

to which the bus was capcized and caused the accident. In the said accident, the 1st

petitioner-Ramesh sustained multiple injuries all over his body and was

immediately taken to MCH Hospital, Kottayam and from there he was shifted to

Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore for further treatment. The right leg of the 1st

Page 3 of 14

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

C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

petitioner was amputated. The Erumalai police registered a case in Crime No.983

of 2014 against the driver of the bus under Section 279, 337, 338 IPC. The 1st

petitioner-Ramesh at the time of the accident was aged about 27 years, painter by

profession and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to the accident, he was

unable to do any work as before. During the pendency of the claim, the 1st

petitioner-Ramesh died on 31.03.2015 leaving behind petitioners 2 to 5 as his legal

heirs, not attributed to the injuries suffered by the accident. Based on the above

contention, the petitioners 2 to 5 assessed the damages at Rs.20,00,000/- and

prayed for an award against the respondents. The 1st and 2nd respondents being the

owner and insurer of the offending vehicle respectively as on date of the accident

and hence, they were jointly and severaly liable to pay compensation to the

petitioners.

5.In order to prove their case, the petitioners have examined P.W.1 to P.W.3

and relied on 18 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to P.18. The claim of the petitioners

was resisted by the 2nd respondent in their counter statement stating that the

accident was not due to the negligence of the driver of the bus. The petition does

not disclose the cause of death of the 1st petitioner and in fact the 1st petitioner died

Page 4 of 14

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

C.M.A.No.2181 of 2021

after few months from the date of accid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top