The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent-2 against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Trichirappalli passed in M.C.O.P.No. 2018 of 2005, dated 07.11.2012.
2. It is the case of an accident causing injury, which took place on 01.12.2004 at about 13.30 hours near Karattampatti, Kattumurugan Kovil.
3. It is the case of the claimant before the Tribunal that when the petitioner was travelling as a load man in the first respondent's load auto bearing Registration No.TN-48 B-7311, from Kuruvikarankulam towards Thuraiyur, the driver of the vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, due to which the vehicle got capsized. As a result, the petitioner sustained fracture on left hand and injuries all over his body and took treatment at various hospitals
4. The claimant filed an application in M.C.O.P.No.2018 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/(Chief Judicial Magistrate), Trichirappalli, seeking compensation.
5.Before the Tribunal, the appellant/respondent-2 examined one witness as R.W.1 and marked one document as Ex.R.1 On the side of the respondent/claimant, two witnesses were examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 and eight documents were marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8.
6.The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced on either side and also on appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto bearing registration No.TN-48 B-7311 and therefore directed the second respondent to pay a sum of Rs.97,000/-to the claimants as compensation.
7. Against which, the appellant/Respondent filed the present appeal to set aside the award of the Tribunal.
8.This Court heard the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record.
9.In so far as the liability the Tribunal has observed as follows: .. in the cases reported in 2011 ? 2 TNLJ 441 and (2012) 5MLJ, 592, relied on by the petitioner, it is held that even gratuitous passengers or a loan man is entitled for compensation and the insurance company is liable to recover the same from insurer. On considering all the facts the petitioner proves that he travelled as a loan man in the load auto. Admittedly the auto is belonging to the first respondent insured with the second respondent. So the second respondent is liable to pay compensation to the claimant and recover the same from the first respondent.
10. The appellant /Insurance company has not raised any dispute with regard to the quantum of compensation.
11.A perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal clearly shows that the Tribunal has discussed in detail and found that due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto, which was insured with the appellant/Insurance Company, the vehicle got capsized and hence, directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation to the claimant and recover the same from the first respondent. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the award passed by the Tribunal and the same does not require interference at the hands of this Court.
12. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the award dated 07.11.2012, passed in M.C.O.P.No.2018 of 2005, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichirappalli is hereby confirmed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interests and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already deposited and recover the same from the first respondent. On such deposit being made, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount, with accrued interests and costs, without filing any formal petition before the Tribunal. No Costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli.
.