C.M.A(MD)No.2022 of 2013

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on

: 02.12.2022

Pronounced on

: 09.02.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI

C.M.A(MD)No.2022 of 2013

The New India Assurance Company Limited,

Rep., by its Branch Manager,

Having office at Pillars Gate,

Opposite to Anna Stadium,

Bangalore.

...Appellant/ 2^nd Respondent

Vs

1.M.Shanthi

... 1^st Respondent/1^st Petitioner

2.Mohan

... 2^nd Respondent/2^nd Petitioner

3.Suganthi

... 3^rd Respondent/3^rd Petitioner

4.Latha @ Karthika

... 4^th Respondent/4^th Petitioner

5.Murugan

... 5^th Respondent/1^st Respondent

6.M/s.Rathi Meena Travels,

Having Office at 262,

M.M.Adigal Salai,

Pondicherry.

... 6^th Respondent/3^rd Respondent

7.The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,

Rep., by its Branch Manager,

Having Office at 2407/21, II Floor,

Sathiyamoorthy Road, Pudukkottai.

... 7^th Respondent/4^th Respondent

1 / 16

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

C.M.A(MD)No.2022 of 2013

PRAYER :-

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and award dated

01.04.2011 made in M.C.O.P.No.684 of 2007 on the file of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam.

For Appellant

: Mr.D.Sivaraman

For R1 to R4

: Mr.N.Subramani

For R7

: Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran

for R5 & R6

: No appearance

JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the order in

M.C.O.P.No.684 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal/Additional Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam. The appellant herein

is the second respondent, respondents 1 to 4 are the claimants 1 to 4. The

respondents 5,6,7 herein are the respondents 1,3 and 4.

2.Brief substance of the claim petition is as follows:

On 18.06.2007, when the deceased Vinoth was travelling in a bus

bearing registration number PY 01 Z2244, a tempo van bearing registration

2 / 16

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

C.M.A(MD)No.2022 of 2013

number TN 51 X 2800 going ahead of the said bus, the van was driven by its

driver in a rash and negligent manner and the van suddenly took a turn

towards its right, without giving any signal. On seeing this unexpected

turning, the driver of the bus tried to avoid hitting against the van, turned the

vehicle to his right, even then, the front portion of the bus slightly touched the

right front side of the van. Due to the impact, the driver of the bus became

nervous and the bus got off the road and stopped at a distance of 150 feet after

hitting against a coconut tree. The driver and other passengers sustained

multiple injuries. The deceased sustained serious injury and he died on the

spot. The deceased was working as a fitter doing centring work and was

earning Rs.200/- per day. The petitioners are his dependants and they claim a

sum of Rs.10 Lakhs as compensation.

3.Brief substance of the counter filed by the second respondent is as

follows:

The vehicle was insured with the respondent and the policy was in force

at the time of accident. The driver of the van was having valid driving

licence. The respondent denied the manner of the accident as stated in the

petition. The van driver drove the vehicle in a very slow and cautious

3 / 16

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

C.M.A(MD)No.2022 of 2013

manner. It was the bus which came behind the van, was driven in a rash and

negligent manner came from behind the van and dashed against the van. The

bus driver was the sole reason for the accident. Since the bus driver and the

other passengers sustained severe injuries, the FIR was registered against the

van driver. The FIR and the MV report clearly reveals that the driver of the

bus dashed against the van from behind. The respondent denied the age,

avocation and income of the deceased. The claim is excessive. This

respondent is not liable to pay compensation.

4.Brief substance of the counter filed by