← Library
Madras High CourtCRP/1672/2023disposed of

M.Chinnappan v. S.P.Kandasamy

2023-06-13Honourable Dr Justice D.Nagarjun4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN M.Chinnappan . . . Petitioner

Versus

1.S.P.Kandasamy

2. Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Sri Lakshmi Complex, Omalur Main Road, Bharathi Street, Swarnapuri, Salem - 637 207 . . .

Respondents PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the docket order dated 28.03.2023 passed in I.A.Sr.No.3096 of 2023 in M.A.C.T.O.P. Sr.No.3096 of 2023 on the file of MAC Tribunal/sub-ordinate Judge, Sangagiri and direct the MAC Tribunal/Sub-Ordinate Judge, Sangagiri to take M.A.C.T.O.P. Sr.No.3096 of 2023 along with the petition to condone delay and proceed in accordance with law.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Santhanaraman

ORDER

Heard Mr.M.Santhanaraman, learned counsel on record representing the petitioner.

Page No.1/4

2.This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the return endorsement made by the Trial Court in Unnumbered MACTOP SR.No.3096 of 2023 on 28.03.2023, wherein the petition filed for seeking compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, has been returned on the ground that the petition is barred by limitation as per the Amendments relating to the Motor Accident Claims which came into force on 01.04.2022.

3.Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the decision rendered in A.S.KRISHNAN VS. NAJEEB AND OTHERS [OP (MAC) No.6 of 2023 decided on 23.01.2023] of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, his claim petition should not be returned on the ground of limitation. In this regard, it is relevant to extract para 24 of the said decision, which reads as follows:- " 24.As a fall out of my findings, the impugned orders are set aside, it is held that the provisions of the Limitation Act would be applicable for entertaining the petitions for claiming the compensation even beyond the period of six months, for, by taking into consideration, Rule 17 of Annexure XIII framed under Rule 150A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, the limitation to entertain the claim petition cannot be Page No.2/4

restricted to six (6) months as there is no provision in the Act excluding the applicability of provisions of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. In other words, it is held that the claim petitions, if filed beyond the period of six months cannot be dismissed in limine."

4.Considering the same, the Trial Court is directed to consider the claim petition filed by the petitioner in MACTOP SR.No.3096 of 2023 afresh, taking into consideration of the authority of High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam and pass orders, on merits in accordance with law. 5.The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, with the above observation and direction. No costs. 6.Registry is directed to return the original Petition for compensation filed by the petitioner before the Trial Court after substituting the same by a Photostat copy, to the learned counsel on record representing the petitioner.

13.06.2023 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order mp Page No.3/4

Dr.D.NAGARJUN, J.

mp To The MAC Tribunal/Sub-ordniate Judge, Sangagiri.

13.06.2023 Page No.4/4