NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. S.IBRAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/2nd respondent has preferred the appeal in CMA(MD).No.1653 of 2007, against the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.1008 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Madurai.

(2.) THE petitioner has filed the claim in M.C.O.P.No.1008 of 2002, claiming compensation of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the respondents, for the injuries sustained by him in a Motor Vehicle Accident. It was submitted that on 03.06.2001, at about 09.35 a.m., when the petitioner was driving the tempo van bearing registration No.TN-59Q-2346, from Coimbatore towards Chennai and when the van was proceeding near Kochikulathur Village, on the Vizhupuram to Chennai main road, the 1st respondents Mahindra Van bearing registration No.TN-59F-3596, coming in the opposite direction and driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, came on the wrong side of the road and dashed against the front right side of the van driver by the petitioner and caused the accident. In the impact, the petitioner sustained injuries all over his body and was immediately admitted at the Dindivanam Government Hospital and subsequently was referred for further treatment at Government Hospital, Chennai. In the accident, the petitioner sustained fractures of bones in his face, right leg joint, left middle finger. Even after treatment, as the fractured bones and not united, the petitioner is unable to stand or walk. At the time of accident, the petitioner was working as a tempo van driver and earning a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month. Due to the disability sustained by him in the accident, the petitioner is not able to do any work. Hence, the petitioner had filed the claim against the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are the owner and insurer of the Mahindra Van bearing registration No.TN-59F-3596.

(3.) THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed three issues for consideration in the case namely: (1) Due to whose negligence was the accident caused?; (2) Is the petitioner is entitled to get compensation? If so what is the quantum?; (3) Is the 2nd respondent liable to pay compensation to the petitioner?.