Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 40294
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
Maha Flats – Appellant
Versus
N.Vijayalakshmi – Respondent
CRP No. 1328 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.Shanmugaraj, S.Sharathraj, S.Agalya
Owner of uninsured offending vehicle is a necessary and proper party in motor accident compensation claim.
Headnote:The Civil Revision Petition challenges the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal which dismissed the petition filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC seeking impleadment of the proposed respondent. The core facts revolve around a motor accident claim filed by the respondents where the actual owner of the offending vehicle was not impleaded and the vehicle was uninsured at the time of the accident. The Court determined that the owner of the offending vehicle is a necessary and proper party to the proceedings. The Court framed the issue as to whether the proposed respondent should be impleaded so that liability could be determined effectively. The ratio decidendi is that the owner of an uninsured offending vehicle is a necessary and proper party for proper adjudication of the compensation claim and must therefore be impleaded to avoid prejudice from non-joinder. The revision petition is allowed and the petition filed.
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the Order dated 30.07.2025 passed by the II Judge, Court of Small Causes, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Chennai in MP No. 3 of 2024 in MCOP No. 2078 of
2018.
2. The petitioner herein filed MP No. 3 of 2024 in MCOP No. 2078 of
2018 on the file of the II Judge, Court of Small Causes, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Chennai under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC seeking to implead the proposed respondent as party to the MCOP proceedings.. Upon hearing both sides, the Trial Court dismissed application. Challenging the same the petitioner filed this Civil Revision Petition.
3. Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. A perusal of the records reveals that the respondents filed MCOP proceedings seeking compensation for the deceased, Akshaya. The accident occurred on 19.12.2017 involving vehicle number TN 22 CM 8210. Although S. Ravi was the owner of the offending vehicle at the time, he was not originally impleaded in the proceedings. Consequently, the petitioner filed a petition to implead him as a respondent. Admittedly, the vehicle was not insured on the date of the accident. As the owner, the proposed respondent is a necessary and proper party to the MCOP proceedings. Impleading him causes no prejudice to the existing parties; furthermore, his absence would prevent the court from determining liability for compensation. Accordingly, M.P. No. 3 of 2024 in MCOP No. 2078 of 2018 is allowed.
5. In the result, this civil revision petition is allowed. No costs. Pending petition if any is closed.
