The right of an insurer to recover a portion of an award from another joint tort-feasor does not preclude the claimant from impleading all joint tort-feasors to determine their respective liability in cases of composite negligence.

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order passed by the MACT-cum-Sub-Court at Sankarankovil in I.A.No.2 of 2021 in M.C.O.P.No.88 of 2017, dated 23.6.2022.

2.The facts which are necessary for the disposal of this revision are:

The claimant was travelling in a vehicle bearing Registration NO. TN 38AA1839 on 2.2.2016 at about 10.15 pm which was driven by the first respondent. The car in which he was travelling met with an accident with a lorry bearing Registration No. TN 39 KB 6032.The Petitioner claims that, on account of the accident, he had suffered injuries and invoking Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, he filed a claim petition.

3.At the time of filing the claim petition, the Petitioner has impleaded only the driver, owner and insurer of the car bearing Registration No.TN 38 AA 1839. On service of summons, the third respondent took plea that it was a case of composite negligence of the drivers of the car and the lorry. Hence, it called upon the claimant to implead the owner , driver and insurer of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 39 KB 6032.

4.Pursuant thereto, the Petitioner filed I.A.No.2 of 2021 to implead the owner,driver and insurer of the vehicle bearing Registration No. TN 39 KB 6032. Obviously, the petitioner filed an application taking into consideration the objections raised by the original third respondent,the United India Insurance Company.

5.The learned Tribunal took up this application as I.A.No.2 of 2021. Notice was ordered to the driver, owner and insurer of the lorry. All the proposed petitioners remained exparte.

6.The learned Tribunal, instead of allowing the application in the light of the objections raised by the third respondent, referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Khenyei .vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, and others, 2015 (1) TNMAC 801(SC), it held that it is open to the claimant to claim compensation from the third respondent/insurer of the car and thereafter the insurer of the car can recover the amount from the insurer of the lorry, consequently, it dismissed the Petition. Hence this revision.

7.Heard Mr.,V.Sukumar, for the Petitioner, Mr.K.S.Gukanesan, for third respondent appearing on behalf of Mr.I.Robert Chandrakumar and Mr.D.Sivaraman, for the sixth respondent. Perused the material placed before this Court.

8.A reading of the claim petition shows that the accident had occurred on account of a collision between two vehicles, namely, lorry bearing Registration No. TN 39 BK 6032 and car bearing Registration No. TN 38 AA 1839. Hence, the issue whether the accident had taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the car or whether both the drivers are joint tort- feasors or the lorry is certainly an issue that has to be decided in the claim petition.

9.The learned Tribunal dismissed the application referring to the Khenyei’s case (as cited supra), wherein, the Court had pointed out that in cases of joint tort-feasors, the insurer of one of the vehicles may settle the claim and thereafter, it has the liberty to recover, insofar as the percentage of award to be paid by the other vehicle from its owner/insurer.The Supreme Court did not hold that an application to implead either of the joint tort-feasor or their insurer is not maintainable.On the contrary, the Court held that in case, the jont tort-feasors, have been impleaded and the evidence is sufficient, it is open to the Court/Tribunal to determine inter-se extent of composite negligence of the drivers and pass an award accordingly. Reliance on this judgment to hold that an impleading application is not mainta