United India Insurance Co. Ltd v. Rameshkumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

DATED : 30.09.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA and C.M.P.No.2965 of 2022 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 United India Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office - II, D.O.II, 104-A, Peramanaur Main Road, Peramanaur, Salem - 636 007.

...Respondent/Appellant

Vs.

1.Rameshkumar

...Petitioner/1st Respondent

2.G.K.Narayanan ...1st Respondent/2nd Respondent Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the Award and Decree dated 30.09.2013 in M.C.O.P.No.419 of 2009 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Salem. For Appellant :

Ms.R.Sree Vidhya For Respondents :

Mr.R.Marudhachalamurthy for R1 R2 - Served - No appearance 1/4

JUDGMENT

The appellant Insurance Company has challenged the Award passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Salem, M.C.O.P.No.419 of 2009 on the ground that the petitioner/1st respondent herein has filed a petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act and he being the tortfeasor was not entitled to compensation.

2.Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the papers.

3.The narration of the accident would prove the above contention. It is stated by the petitioner that on 21.08.2008, when he was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 30AA 1220 on the Fort main road to Shevapet, a pedestrian has suddenly crossed the road and in order to avoid hitting the pedestrian the claimant had applied a sudden brake, as a result of which, the petitioner has fallen on the road and sustained grievous injuries. It is therefore clear that the accident had occurred only on account of the 2/4

negligence of the petitioners himself. That being the case, he cannot seek to be compensated being the tortfeasor himself and the Tribunal below has committed an error in awarding compensation of a sum of Rs.5,59,000/- together with interest.

4.Therefore, applying the ratio of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Ramkhiladi and another v. The United India Insurance Company and another [2020 (2) SCC 550], the petitioner is not entitled to compensation under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Award of the Tribunal is set aside.

In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 30.09.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order mps To The II Additional District Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Salem.

3/4

P.T. ASHA, J, mps and C.M.P.No.2965 of 2022 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 30.09.2022 4/4