High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 08 MAD CK 0038

The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs R.Raja, & Anr.

Madras High Court · Decided on 29 August 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
J.Nisha Banu
CASE NUMBER
75 of 2013 and M P (MD)Nos 1 of 2013 and 1 of 2014

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

35 paragraphs · 705 words
1.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company against the award made in M.C.O.P.No.124 of 2012 on

the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai.

2.

The brief facts of the case are as follows:

It is a case of injury, which occurred in the accident which took place on 24.02.2007 at about 06.30 a.m. When the injured/claimant was working

as Assistant conductor in the bus bearing Registration No.TN-49-L-7755 belonging to the first respondent, which was insured with the second

respondent/Insurance Company and the bus was at Kattukkarai Arasamaram Bus stop and before he could board the bus and gave whistle, the

bus driver suddenly started the bus, as a result of which he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was

admitted in the hospital and he was taking treatment continuously. Now he is having difficulty in standing and walking and he has sustained

disabilities. At the time of the accident, the claimant was aged about 38 years and was earning a sum of Rs.7,000/-p.m. Hence, the injured

claimant filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.124 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, cum Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation.

3.

Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, two witnesses viz., P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and eight documents viz., Exs.P.1 to P.2

were marked and on the side of the respondents, one witness viz., R.W.1 was examined and no document was marked.

4.

The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence and arguments of the counsel appearing on either side and also

appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred only, due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonged to the first

respondent and directed the appellant/Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.1,13,000/-, as compensation.

5.

Against which, the appellant/Insurance Company has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

6.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed only on the ground of liability. There is no dispute with regard to the accident. The learned Counsel for

the appellant would contend that at the time of accident, since the injured claimant was working as assistant conductor, there is no coverage of

insurance policy for him and hence he is not entitled to any compensation. Hence, the Tribunal is erred in awarding compensation to the injured

claimant. Therefore, he seeks interference of this Court to the award passed by the Tribunal.

7.

The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that based on the available oral and documentary evidences, the Tribunal has rightly come

to the conclusion and arrived at correct compensation under various heads.

8.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the materials available on record.

9.

There is no dispute with regard to the accident. The accident had occurred while the injured claimant was travelling in the bus. Even by relying

upon the evidence of R.W.1- the owner of the bus that the inured claimant was not working as assistant conductor, since he was travelling in the

bus at the time of accident, he can be treated as a passenger and if that being so, he is entitled to claim compensation for the injuries sustained by

him during the accident. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the award passed by the Tribunal.

Therefore, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal deserves to be dismissed.

10.

In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the award made in M.C.O.P.No.124 of 2012, on the file of Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal cum Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai is hereby confirmed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to

deposit the entire award amount with accrued interests and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if

not already deposited and on such deposit being made, the injured - claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount with accrued

interests and costs without filing any formal petition before the Tribunal. No Costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.