ANBAZHAGAN Vs. V SHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the claimants and the Insurance Company respectively against the Judgement and Decree dated 15.07.2008 made in MCOP.No.3537/2005 by the learned II Judge, Small Causes Court (MACT) Chennai, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,54,948/- as compensation to the appellants in CMA.No.4107/2008, who are the husband, two minor children and father of the deceased Asha, who died in the motor accident that had occurred on 2.3.2005.

(2.) The brief facts are that on 2.3.2005 at about 8.20 a.m. at Chinmaya Nagar, the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider in the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.10-B-6043 owned by her younger brother V.Shankar, who is the 1st Respondent in CMA.No.4107/2008 driven by her youngest brother V.Arunachalam for going to the School where she was employed as a Teacher. Due to rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle, the motorcycle slipped into an uneven rough and dipping surface on the road, as a result of which, the deceased fell down and sustained severe head injuries. She was immediately taken to the Surya Hospital, Chennai and despite intensive treatment given to her, she succumbed to the injuries on 11.3.2005 in the said hospital. The accident was intimated in writing to the Inspector of Police, Pondy Bazaar with a copy marked to the Dean of the Hospital. According to the claimants, the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle and thus, they claimed a sum of Rs.15,30,000/- as compensation.

(3.) The Appellant Insurance Company resisted the claim by filing a counter denying the allegations made in the claim petition, stating that the accident had occurred only due to the carelessness and negligent act of the pillion rider. It is further contended that there was no coverage in the policy for the pillion rider. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle. The Tribunal, taking into account that Ex.R2 policy is the package policy wherein the pillion riders are covered, held that the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation.