- (1.) The appellant / second respondent has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2008, made in M.C.O.P.No.128 of 2007, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court (Fast Track Court-II), Kancheepuram.
(2.) The short facts of the case are as follows:- The claimants had stated that the fist claimant's husband namely Arumugam was travelling as a Coolie on a tractor bearing registration No.TN21 I6557, on 28.12.2006, at about 05.00 p.m., on Villipakkam Village Road and at that point of time, the driver of the tractor had driven it in a rash and negligent manner and at a high speed and had suddenly applied brakes, due to which the deceased Arumugam had fallen down and the wheel of the tractor had run over him, resulting in his death. Hence, the claimants had filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.128 of 2007, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court (Fast Track Court-II), Kancheepuram, against the insurer and owner of the vehicle, claiming a compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- for the death of the said Arumugam in the motor vehicle accident.
(3.) The second respondent Insurance Company had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The second respondent had submitted that the tractor was not registered at the time of the accident with the transport authorities and as such the vehicle had not been covered under valid documents. They had denied the averments made in the claim petition regarding age, income and occupation of the deceased. They had also denied the averments made in the claim petition that the accident had been caused by the driver of the tractor. As per permit, only the driver of the tractor was permitted to operate the vehilce and there is no seating capacity for travelling of other passengers and as such the deceased and another person were allowed to sit on the mudguard, the deceased had fallen down due to his own negligence. As such, there is a violation of policy condition. As per the averments of the claimants, the deceased was travelling as a coolie. Therefore, the claimants have to approach the proper forum to get relief and they are not entitled to get relief from the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.;