(1.) The 2nd Respondent in MCOP No.462 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Principal District Court, Perambalur, is the appellant herein. They are the insurers of the offending vehicle and claimed that liability to pay compensation should not have been mulcted on them.
(2.) MCOP No.462 of 2014 had been filed by the two claimants for the death of their son Chelladurai in a road accident which took place on 22/3/2013. It was stated that on that particular date at around 8.00 a.m., Chelladurai was travelling as a cleaner in a Tractor bearing registration No.TN-31-P-9927 belonging to the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent therein. The vehicle was driven by one Rajasekar. They were both working in Shanmugham cashew-nut groove. While driving the tractor, the driver Rajasekar suddenly applied brakes and as a result, Chelladurai was thrown out of the tractor and fell down in between the two wheels on the left side of the tractor and was run over and died on the spot. It was claimed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver. A First Information Report in Crime No.61 of 2013 had been registered by Andimadam Police under Sec. 304(A) IPC. The claimants / parents of Chelladurai filed the aforementioned claim petition seeking compensation under Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
(3.) A counter had been filed by the 2nd respondent / insurer stating that the deceased was sitting in a casual manner and fell down from the tractor. It was also stated that the accident occurred only owing to the carelessness of the deceased. It was also stated that the vehicle had no valid documents and was also not insured. It was also stated that it was used for commercial purpose. It was further stated that the deceased as a gratuitous passenger and the vehicle being a goods vehicle and the deceased not being a third party and since premium was not paid to cover such accident, they are not liable to pay any compensation.