1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM C.M.A(MD)No.807 of 2011 1.Palaniyammal 2.Marimuthu .. Appellants/Claimants Vs. 1.P.Mani 2.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Ltd, Arcade, III Floor Annamalai Nagar Karur Bye-pass Road Thillai Nagar Trichirapalli-620 018. .. Respondents/Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 10.02.2011 passed in MCOP No.1 of 2009 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Kulithalai, Karur District. For Appellant : Mr.N.Sudhagar Nagaraj For R – 1 : No appearance For R – 2 : Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been directed against the award dated 10.02.2011 passed in MCOP No.1 of 2009 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Kulithalai. 2. The appellants as petitioners have filed MCOP No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal praying to pass an award for the amount mentioned therein, wherein the present respondents have been shown as respondents. 3. On the basis of the available evidence on record the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has passed an award of Rs.3,60,000/- and directed the first respondent to pay the same to the petitioners. Against the liability fixed upon the first respondent, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the petitioners as appellants. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/petitioners has contended that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal without considering the stand taken on the side of the petitioners with regard to policy and driving licence has erroneously exonerated the second respondent from liability and in order to prove that the vehicle involved in the accident has been duly insured with the second respondent and the driver of the first respondent has possessed of valid licence at the time of accident, MP(MD)NO.1 of 2011 has been filed for reception of additional evidence. Under the said circumstances the finding with regard to liability given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is erroneous and the entire award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 5. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has fixed the entire liability upon the first respondent. During pendency of the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, on the side of the appellants/petitioners MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 has been filed for reception of additional evidence. Along with MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 Insurance Policy, Registration Certificate and Driving Licence have been filed. Considering the fact that the documents filed in MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 are very much essential for the purpose of deciding the liability of the respondents, this Court is of the view to set aside the award passed in MCOP No.1 of 2009 and remit the matter to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 6.In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed without cost and the award passed in MCOP No.1 of 2009 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Kulithalai is set aside and MCOP No.1 of 2009 is remitted to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Kulithalai. The appellants/petitioners are directed to file all the documents mentioned in MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 by way of examining proper persons. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Kulithalai is directed to dispose of MCOP No.1 of 2009 before the end of 2011 and report the same to the Registry without fail. The respondents are also entitled to adduce evidence. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To The Subordinate Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ Kulithalai +One cc to Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan, Advocate, SR.No.31494 mj rl/3c – 28.9.2011 C.M.A(MD)No.807 of 2011 14.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/