SEETHALAKSHMI Vs. SATHISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeals are heard through video-conferencing.

(2.) (a). Both these appeals arise out of a common order dtd. 30/10/2015 passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.454 and 455 of 2011 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal Subordinate Court, Tiruvannamalai. By the said order, the Tribunal allowed M.C.O.P.No.454 of 2011 filed by the injured claimant and directed the second respondent/Insurance Company, which is the insurer of the Ford Car bearing Registration No.TN-25-B-6333, to pay a sum of Rs.1,65,000.00 to her as compensation, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

(3.) In the above background, we will deal with the case projected by the claimants in the respective claim petitions. C.M.A.No.787 of 2016 (pertaining to M.C.O.P.No.454 of 2011 (originally filed as M.C.O.P.No.175 of 2003) :