LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-75

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. INNASIMUTHU

Decided On July 06, 2012
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
V/S
M.NAGARAJAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/2nd respondent-insurance company has filed this civil miscellaneous appeal praying for reduction of compensation as against the award and decree dated 30.12.2004 made in M.C.O.P.No.1281 of 2002 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.5), Tiruppur.

(2.) The first respondent, who is the petitioner in the abovesaid O.P, has filed the claim petition for compensation of Rs.5 lakhs for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident. The contention of the petitioner is that on 30.4.2002 at about 11.30 pm, while he was driving moped bearing Regn.No.TN-39-M8406 towards east on the extreme left side of Tirupur-Dharapuram road near Gem Departmental store, the lorry bearing Regn.No.TN-37-C-4525, belonging to 2nd respondent herein/1st respondent in the O.P, came in the opposite direction towards west in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the moped, in which the petitioner sustained severe fracture injuries in the right thigh, right cheek and severe injuries all over the body and he was admitted in Government Hospital at Tirupur and also admitted at CMC Hospital, Coimbatore and Government Hospital, Madurai, and he was taking treatment till the filing of the petition. It is further stated by the petitioner that at the time of accident, he was 22 years old and he was fish merchant and earning Rs.4,000/- pm. The petitioner has further stated that since the accident was occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver, the second respondent herein, who is the owner of the lorry and the appellant, who is insurer of the lorry, are liable to pay compensation to the petitioner.

(3.) The owner of the abovesaid lorry remained exparte before the Tribunal and only the appellant herein, who is the second respondent in the abovesaid O.P, contested and in its counter, it denied the manner of accident alleged in the petition and contended that the accident was occurred only due to the moped rider's negligent driving of the moped without observing traffic rules, which caused injuries and therefore the insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. It is further stated in the counter that the claimant should prove the age, avocation and income, policy particulars, validity of driving licence, nature of injuries etc and further contended that the amount of compensation claimed on various heads are highly excessive.