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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3906

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R. POORNIMA
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE C – Appellant
Versus
RABEEKA BEGUM – Respondent



BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date of Reserved 04/11/2025 Date of Pronounced 28/01/2026 CORAM The Hon'ble Ms.Justice R.POORNIMA CMA(MD)No.384 of 2023 and CMP(MD)Nos.4578 of 2023 and 2035 of 2025 The United India Insurance Company Limited, Motor Third Party Claims Office, 3rd Floor, West Veli Veethi (Near Ranimangammal Chatram), Madurai-625 001.

Represented through its Branch Manager, Madurai. : Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs.

1.Rabeek Begum

2.Minor Alhana Irsath

3.Minor Asaddeen Umar (Minor respondents 2 and 3 represented through their mother and next friend, the 1st rspondent Rabeeka Begum)

4.Meeranji

5.Kursthie : Respondents 1 to 5/

Petitioners

6.Mickel : 6th Respondent/1st Respondent PRAYER:-Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Theni, in MCOP No.176 of 2017, dated 03/07/2019 as against the appellant.

For Appellant : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar For R1 to R5 : Mr.Ananth C.Rajesh For 6th Respondent : No appearance

J U D G M E N T

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred against the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Theni, in MCOP No.176 of 2017, dated 03/07/2019.

2.The brief case of the claimant are as follows:-

On 14.07.2017 at about 04.50 hours, the deceased (Saleem)

was riding his two wheeler No.TN-60-V-5808 from west to east direction on Bodinaickanur to Thenimain road. While he was proceeding near AIADMK Party Office, the driver of the Car No.TN-09-AU-5142 belonged to the 1st respondent drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two wheeler. In the said accident,the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he was immediately, taken to the Government Hospital, Theni. Thereafter, he was referred to Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, for further treatment, however, he succumbed to the injuries on 14.07.2017. Over the occurrence, a case in Crime No.496 of 2017 was registered by the Palanichettiyatti Police Station for the offences under Sections 279 and 304(A) IPC against the driver of the offending vehicle.

3.At the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 32 years and was working as Electrical Engineer in Arun Enterprises, Theni and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. Claiming compensation of Rs. 70,00,000/- for the death of the deceased Saleem, the legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Tribunal.

4.The 1st respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

The appellant Insurance Company filed their counter disputing the manner of the accident as projected by the claimants,contended that the accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent act of the deceased. The appellant further denied the occupation and income of the deceased and its liability to pay the compensation. It was further contended that the claim is excessive and exorbitant.

5.Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, 4 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.4 and 23 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P23. On the side of the respondents, 2 witnesses were examined as R.W.1 and R.W.2 and 4 documents were marked as Exs.R1 to R4.

6.After considering the material evidence and records, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.35,49,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and directed the 2nd respondent Insurance Company to pay the said award amount.

7.Aggrieved over the order of the Tribunal, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant Insurance Company, disputing the manner of accident and their liability to pay the compensation.

8. It is further submitted that the deceased was solely responsible for the accident, as the accident took place on the left side of the road, as evident from the rough sketch (Ex.R2) and observation mahazar (Ex.R1). The insurance company, therefore, contended that the material on record clearly establishes that the deceased contributed to the accident

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top