A. VASANTHI Vs. S. JAYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is at the instance of the Claimants, who had sought for Compensation for the death of one K. Arulappan in a Motor Accident that occurred on 26/2/2009 at about 11.30 hours, while the said Arulappan was walking near rear gate of the Madhavaram Milk Dairy was hit by a Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-04-C-7396, which came in the opposite direction. Claiming that the Lorry was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its Driver and the accident was the result of the said negligence of the Driver, the Claimants sought for a Compensation of Rs.27,00,000..00 The quantum was sought to be supported by the plea that the deceased was working in the Madhavaram Dairy and was earning Rs.18,000.00 per month. Compensation for Loss of Love and Affection, Consortium, Funeral Expenses, etc. was also claimed.

(2.) The Claim Petition was resisted by the 2nd Respondent/Insurer of the Lorry contending that the vehicle insured with it namely, Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-04-C-7396 was not involved in the accident at all. The Insurance Company pointed out that the First Information Report filed on the date of the accident did not disclose the vehicle that was involved in the accident. All that was stated was, a Lorry carrying Milk came in the opposite direction and dashed against Arulappan. The Insurance Company also relied upon the fact that no Final Report was filed pursuant to the First Information Report, which was marked as Ex.P1 and the Magistrate had closed the First Information Report as time barred under Sec. 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The details of employment and the income were also denied. The quantum of Compensation claimed was termed as excessive.

(3.) At trial, before the Tribunal, the 1st Claimant/Wife of Arulappan was examined as PW1 and four other Witneses were examined as PW2 to PW5. One S. Elango, who was the Sub-Inspector of Police, Transport Investigation Wing, Chintadripet, Chennai was examined as PW2. One K. Vimala, PW2, was examined as an Eyewitness and one G.D.N. Chandran was examined as PW4. Exs.P1 to P15 were marked. The copy of the unfiled Charge-sheet was marked as Ex.P11. On the side of the 2nd Respondent/Insurance Company G. Ramamurthy, the Driver of the Lorry was examined as RW1 & Exs.R1 to R5 were marked.