S.CHANDRASEKARAN Vs. MURUGANANTHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant / petitioner has preferred the present appeal against the award made in M.C.O.P.No.692 of 2006, on the file of Principal District Court, Erode & District.

(2.) The short facts of the case are as follows: -

(3.) The third respondent, in his counter has submitted that the accident had occurred only due to the negligence of the petitioner. It was submitted that the first respondent did not have a valid driving licence at the time of accident and as such, the third respondent is not liable to pay compensation. It was submitted that the R.C.book stands in the name of Gunasekaran and subsequently, the said vehicle had been purchased by one Sakthivel of Thindal, Erode through finance and he is using the vehicle without changing the ownership. As this is a violation of policy condition, the third respondent is not liable to pay compensation. The averments in the claim regarding employment and income of the petitioner, nature of injuries and treatment was also not admitted.