ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. V RAMYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Appeals are filed by the Appellant/Insurance Company against the judgment and decree dated 28.04.2014 made in M.C.O.P.Nos.5142 and 5166 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, respectively.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the Tribunal. The case of the petitioners/claimants in both the petitions M.C.O.P.Nos.5142 and 5166 of 2012 is that on 11.03.2012 at about 21.45 hours while the petitioners/claimants were travelling as pillion riders in the two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-04-AD-3731 driven by the deceased Venkatraman (M.C.O.P.No.5917/2012) towards Thiruvottiyur in Ennore Express Road and while going near Kumaran ITI, Kaladipet, Chennai, another motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-04-Q-5051 came at high speed, dashed against the petitioners/claimants' motorcycle, causing multiple grievous injuries to the petitioner/claimant in M.C.O.P.No.5142/2012 - V.Ramya including deep cut injuries in her right ankle, laceration 4th toe, laceration 5th toe, abrasion in fore head and Abrasions all over the body. So far as the petitioner/claimant in M.C.O.P.No.5166/2012 - K.Jothilakshmi is concerned she got multiple injuries, including laceration over the right ankle and right 4th and 5th toes. The accident had occurred due to negligence of the 1st respondent vehicle's driver only. The petitioners/claimants were aged 25 and 36 years and they were working as Tailors', earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. Due to the injuries suffered they are unable to carry on their avocation, resulting in loss of income. Thus, the petitioners/claimants seek a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation from the respondents who are the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle.

(3.) On the other hand, opposing the claim of the petitioners/claimants, by filing counter, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company contends that the accident did not occur due to the negligence of the 1st respondent's vehicle rider. The petitioners/claimants have to prove that the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-04-25051 was insured with the 2nd respondent and the failure on the part of the petitioners/claimants to implead the owner and insurer of the vehicle in which the petitioners/claimants travelled is fatal to the case. The claim of the petitioners/claimants about their age, avocation, income, nature of injuries and disabilities suffered are denied. The claim of the petitioners/claimants is exorbitant. Thus, the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company sought for dismissal of the petitions.