1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN C.M.A.(MD)No.545 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.5 of 2011 1.P.Kandimuthu (died) 2.Karuppathal 3.Anusya Devi 4.Amutha Appllants 2 to 4 are brought on record as LRs of the Sole Appellant vide orderer dated: 20.06.2011 made in MP. (MD)No. 6 to 8 of 2011 in CMA. 545 of 2011 ..Appellants -Vs- 1.P.Nachimuthu .. Respondent No 1/Claimant 2.United India Insurance Company Limited, Through it's Branch Manager, Dindigul Road, Palani .. Respondent 2 Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside order and decretal order passed in MCOP No.179 of 1997, dated 19.11.2001, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Subordinate Judge), Palani. For Appellants : Mr.P.Natarajan For R-1 : Mr.K.Vamanan For R-2 : Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran J U D G M E N T This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the award, dated 19.11.2001 and made in M.C.O.P.No.179 of 1997, on the file of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Palani. 2.The first respondent, the owner of the vehicle, is the appellant herein and the claimant is the first respondent. Whereas, the second respondent, Insurance Company is the second respondent herein. 3.The first respondent/claimant has filed the above said claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Palani, claiming a sum of Rs.70,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident said to have been taken place on 24.06.1991 at 05.30 a.m., when his TVS '50' moped bearing registration No. TCL-5966 was rammed by the Kirloskar Tractor bearing registration No. TAK-857 belonging to the first respondent herein, while he was proceeding on Palani to Dharapuram main road for the purpose of attending a marriage at Palani. In the said accident, he had sustained fracture over his left hand and also serious injuries in all over his body. Hence, he has filed the above said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.70,000/-. 4.The appellant/the owner of the Kirloskar Tractor and the Insurance Company have contested the claim of the first respondent on various grounds. 5.On considering the evidence available on record, the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/-, directing the appellant, being the owner of the Kirloskar Tractor to pay the amount on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the ground that the driver of Kirloskar Tractor was not having heavy vehicle licence at the relevant period after absorbing the 2nd respondent Insurance Company from the liability. Being aggrieved by the award, the first respondent/owner of the Kirloskar Tractor stands before this Court with this appeal. 6.When the appeal came up for hearing, Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran, learned counsel for the second respondent has fairly admitted that the driver of the Kirloskar Tractor was not having valid and effective driving license at the relevant period and this fact has also been considered by the Tribunal which resulted in the exemption of the Insurance Company and now he has urged that the award passed by the Tribunal may be confirmed and the Insurance Company being second respondent herein may be directed to pay this amount with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 7.It is manifested from the records that the Tractor bearing registration No. TAK-857 which was involved in the accident was covered under valid insurance with the second respondent Insurance Company and hence, the learned Counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the Insurance Company might be fastened with the liability for the wrong committed by the driver of the appellant. 8.This Court has considered the submission made by the learned Counsel for the appellant/owner of the vehicle as well as by the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company. Having regard to the related facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to confirm the award of the Tribunal and to direct the 2nd respondent Insurance Company to pay this award amount as submitted by the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent. 9.In the result, the award dated 19.11.2001 and made in M.C.O.P.No.179 of 1997, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge), Palani is confirmed. 10.The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company is directed to pay this amount as directed by the Tribunal. 11.It is brought to the notice of this Court that the amount has already been deposited with accrued interest. Hence, the first respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the amount directly from the Tribunal, without filing any formal application. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There is no order as to costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( AE ) /TRUE COPY/ skn SUB ASST REGISTRAR To:: The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Subordinate Judge, Palani. 1CC TO MR. P. NATARAJAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 42428: 1CC TO MR. K. VAMANAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 42587: 1CC TO MR. C. JAWAHAR RAVINDRAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 42644: DM::2012::JANUARY:18:: C.M.A.(MD)No.545 of 2011 2P:5C:: 02.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/