HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD – Appellant
Versus
N.RANGAN – Respondent
CMA 2092/2013
['M/S S ARUN KUMAR', '', 'M L GANESH', 'M/S N JOHN SELVARAJ', '', 'N BEULAH JOHN SELVARAJ', 'FOR RR &', 'R- VEERAGALIAMMAL', 'R- PACHAIAMMAL', 'R DIED STEPS TAKEN', 'VIDE IN CMP TO OF', 'BATTA WITH PETITION & ENCLOSURE DUE REG R & R', 'NOT READY IN NOTICE REG R & R']
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.11.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.Nos.2092 of 2013 & 2265 of 2014
and
M.P.No.1 of 2013 & C.M.P.No.21529 of 2017
C.M.A.No.2092 of 2013:
National Insurance Company Limited,
No.17, Mount Road,
Chennai – 600 002.
.. Appellant/2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.N.Rangan
2.R.Vijayakumari
Mariyappan Nadar (died)
..Respondents 1 & 2/Claimants
3.Veeragaliammal
4.Narayanasamy (died)
5.Pachaiammal
..Respondents 3 to 5/Respondents 3 to 5
6.Jayanthi
7.Vanmathi
.. Respondents 6 & 7/LRs of R4
(R6 & R7 brought on record as LRs of the
deceased R4 viz., Narayanasamy vide order of
this Court dated 25.02.2020 made in
C.M.P.Nos.3717 to 3719 of 2020 in C.M.A.No.2092
of 2013)
C.M.A.No.2265 of 2014:
1.N.Rangan
2.R.Vijayakumari
.. Appellants/Claimants
Vs.
1.Mariyappan Nadar (Died)
2.National Insurance Company Limited,
No.751, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 002.
..Respondents 1 & 2/Respondents 1 & 2
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3.Veeragaliammal
4.Narayanasamy (died)
5.Pachaiammal
..Respondents 3 to 5/Respondents 3 to 5
6.Jayanthi
7.Vanmathi
.. Respondents 6 & 7/LRs of R4
(R6 & R7 brought on record as LRs of the
deceased R4 viz., Narayanasamy vide order of
this Court dated 02.07.2018 made in
C.M.P.Nos.6660 to 6662 of 2018 in C.M.A.No.2265
of 2014)
Common Prayer: These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed under
Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment
and Decree dated 28.11.2012 made in M.C.O.P.No.3136 of 2005 on
the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Small Causes
Court, Chennai.
C.M.A.No.2092 of 2013:
For Appellant :
Mr.S.Arunkumar
For RR 1 & 2
:
Ms.V.Srimathi
for Mr.N.John Selvaraj
For RR 3 & 5
:
No appearance
RR6 & 7
:
R4 Died steps taken
Not ready in Notice
C.M.A.No.2265 of 2014:
For Appellants :
Ms.V.Srimathi
for Mr.N.John Selvaraj
For R2
:
Mr.S.Arunkumar
For RR 3, 6 & 7:
No appearance
R1, R5 Died
R4 Died Steps taken
C O M M O N J U D G M E N T
The matter is heard through “Video Conferencing”.
2.C.M.A.No.2092 of 2013 is filed by the Insurance Company
against the award dated 28.11.2012 made in M.C.O.P.No.3136 of
2005 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Small
Causes Court, Chennai and C.M.A.No.2265 of 2014 is filed by the
claimants for enhancement of compensation.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3.Both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of the same
award and hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.
The parties are referred to as per their rank in the claim
petition, for the sake of convenience.
4.The claimants filed the above said claim petition,
claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death
of one R.Ananth @ Ananthababu, who died in the accident that
took place on 07.04.2005.
5.According to the claimants, on 07.04.2005, the deceased
R.Ananth @ Ananthababu was sent by his employer to repair the
axle of Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 21 Y 9329 which was
coming from Andhra to Chennai at G.N.T. Road. After repairing
the lorry, he slept on the sand load of the lorry. At about
04.00 a.m., the driver of the lorry drove the same in a rash and
negligent manner and while overtaking another lorry, the lorry
in which the deceased traveling was trapped and the deceased who
was sleeping on the sand, got trapped beneath the sand and died
due to suffocation. Therefore, the claimants filed the said
claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation
against the respondents 1 and 2, being the owner and insurer of
the lorry respectively. Pending claim petition, the 1st
respondent-owner of the lorry died and therefore, his legal
heirs were impleaded as respondents 3 to 5 as per the order
dated 21.12.2010 made in M.P.No.3517 of 2006.
6.The 1st respondent-owner of the lorry remained exparte
before the Tribunal.
7.The 2nd
responde