1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.08.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.948 of 2011 Sundari ..Appellant/Petitioner No.2 Vs. 1.Navshan bhai 2.The New India Assurance Company represented by its Divisional Manager having its office at Bank of India Buildings, M.G. Road,Rajkot,Gujarat State. ..1 & 2 Respondents/Respondents 3.C.Muthupandi 4.C.Jeyakanthan 5.C.Senthiliumar (Respondents 3 to 5 are given up) (Respondent No.1 Exparte in the Lower Court) .. Respondents 3 to 5/Petitioners 3 to 5 Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award dated 09.02.2010 passed in M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Madurai. For Appellant .. Mr.C.Godwin For Respondent .. Mr.K.Elangovan No.2 For Respondent .. Given up No.3 to 5 JUDGMENT The award dated 09.02.2010 passed in M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Madurai is being challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The husband of the appellant herein as petitioner has filed M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal praying to pass an award of Rs.5,00,000/- by way of compensation, wherein the present respondents 1 and 2 have been shown as respondents. 3. It is averred in the petition that on 04.09.1997 at about 09.15 p.m, the husband of the second petitioner has driven the bus belongs to the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bearing Registration No.TN-57-N-0667. At that time, the driver of the first respondent has driven the lorry bearing Registration No.GJ-13-T-6201 in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bus, which has been driven by the husband of the second petitioner. Due to accident, he sustained multiple injuries and subsequently he passed away on 25.11.1999. The vehicle which caused the accident has been insured with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the second respondent and therefore the present petition has been filed for getting compensation as mentioned therein. 4. In the counter filed on the side of the second respondent, it is averred that the entire accident has happened due to negligence on the part of the original petitioner. It is false to say that the original petitioner has passed away due to injuries alleged to have been sustained by him and there is no merit in the petition and the same deserves to be dismissed. 5. On the basis of the available evidence on record the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,07,000/- by way of compensation. In order to get enhancement of compensation, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the second petitioner as appellant. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/second petitioner has contended that the accident has happened on 04.09.1997 and due to accident the original petitioner has sustained so many injuries and subsequently on 25.11.1999 he passed away leaving behind him the remaining petitioners, but the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal without considering the monthly income of the original petitioner and also the nature of loss sustained by the remaining petitioners has erroneously awarded a sum of Rs.2,07,000/- by way of compensation and under the said circumstances the compensation in question is liable to be enhanced. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent has contended that the accident has happened on 04.09.1997 and the original petitioner has passed away on 25.11.1999 and on the side of the petitioners no relevant documents have been filed so as to prove that the death has occurred due to the injuries alleged to have been sustained by the original petitioner and the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal without considering the lapses on the part of the petitioners has erroneously awarded a compensation of Rs.2,07,000/- on the basis that the death has occurred only due to the injuries sustained by the original petitioner and the approach made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is totally erroneous and under the said circumstances the entire award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 8. As rightly pointed out on the side of the second respondent, the present petition has been filed by the first petitioner viz., Chinnathambi, wherein it has been stated that the accident has happened on 04.09.1997 and he sustained injuries. It is an admitted fact that the original petitioner has passed away on 25.11.1999. Even though, the original petitioner has passed away on 25.11.1999, no relevant documents have been filed for the purpose of proving that the death has occurred due to the injuries sustained by the original petitioner. Without filing the relevant documents so as to prove the aforesaid fact, it is highly impossible on the part of the Court to come to a conclusion that the death of the original petitioner has occurred due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, which has happened on 04.09.1997. Therefore it is quite clear that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 without getting proper documents has erroneously decided the petition on the basis of the alleged death of the original petitioner and therefore the entire award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is absurd and the same is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 9. In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed without costs and the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Madurai is set aside and M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 is remitted to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Madurai. The appellant/second petitioner is directed to file relevant documents for the purpose of proving the cause of death of the original petitioner. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I), Madurai is directed to dispose of M.C.O.P.No.530 of 1998 on the basis of available evidence before the end of November, 2011 and report the same to the Registry without fail. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Additional District Court (Fast Track Court No.I),Madurai. +1cc to Mr.C.Godwin, Advocate SR.No.27299 +1cc to Mr.K.Elangovan, Advocate SR.No.27166 C.M.A(MD)No.948 of 2011 11.08.2011 smn PA/30.08.2011/3P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/