ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. NITHIYANANTHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second respondent-insurer is the appellant herein. The appeal is filed against the award of compensation of Rs.3,51,000/-in favour of the petitioners/claimants 1 and 2 for the death of one Samuel Sudhakaran, who was the victim of the fatal accident occurred at 9.00 am on 30.7.2003 in front of Seeniyammal Agri Farm near Chettiyapatti Pirivu on Madurai to Dindigul Main Road.

(2.) The date, time and place of the accident and the involvement of the motor cycle bearing Regn. No. TN 59-S-8892 owned and driven by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent at the time of the accident and also involvement of one lorry in the accident, death of Samuel Sudhakaran, who is the son of the petitioners 1 and 2 therein, due to his injuries sustained in the accident, age of the deceased and the claimants 1 and 2, avocation of the deceased and dependency of the claimants upon the deceased, are not so seriously denied.

(3.) The first respondent/owner-cum-driver of the motor cycle did not contest the claim petition. The claim petition was contested only by the second respondent insurance company and the second respondent-insurance company has in its counter denied the manner of the accident as narrated in the claim petition. According to the second respondent, the two wheeler in which the deceased was traveling as pillion rider, was being ridden by the first respondent at slow speed on the extreme left side of the highway by taking all necessary precautions and it was the lorry, which was coming in a rash and negligent manner in the opposite direction and the lorry overtook the vehicle proceeded ahead of it and in doing so, came on the right side and dashed against the two wheeler throwing of both rider and pillion rider and sped away without stopping and both the victims were rushed to a private hospital at Dindigul and the complaint was lodged by the first respondent against the driver of the lorry and the police was not able to trace out the lorry and filed final report closing the case as undetected and submitted the same to the criminal court as the first respondent-rider of the motor cycle is not responsible for the accident, the second respondent is not liable to pay compensation for the death of the pillion rider of the motor cycle.