Madras High Court
Poila vs Ramasamy on 15 March, 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.M.A(MD)No.1198 of 2014
Poila :Appellant/Claimant
.vs.
1.Ramasamy : Respondent/Ist Respondent
2.M/s.Reliance General Insurance,
through its Branch Manager,
Opposite to Suriyan FM Studio,
Vannarapettai,
Tirunelveli and District. :Respondent/IInd Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and decree made in
M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2009, dated 30.3.2011, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal(Fast Track Court No.I), Tirunelveli.
For Appellant :Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan
For Respondent-1 :Mr.S.R.Anbarasu
(No appearance)
For Respondent-2 :Mr.V.Sakthivel
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
JUDGMENT
*********
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the
judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2009, dated
30.3.2011, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Fast
Track Court No.I), Tirunelveli.
2.The claim Petitioner is the appellant herein seeking
enhancement of compensation for the injury sustained in the Road
Traffic Accident on 4.3.2018. Before the Tribunal, the claimant
examined herself as P.W.1 and marked the charge-sheet filed
before the Criminal Court to show that she sustained injury on the
right fore-arm at 2' x 0.5' x 0.5'.The statement was not marked,
however, the Section 161 statement given by the Doctor to the
Inspector of Police is now relied upon. Admittedly, it is an unmarked
document, being a statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C, it is
inadmissible in law. However, the Tribunal taking into consideration
that P.W.8-Dr.Ramaguru, had issued the Wound Certificate is not the
Doctor, who had treated the injured. Accident Register Copy or
Wound Certificate issued by the Government Hospital was not
marked before the Tribunal. By observing so, the Tribunal
2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
disbelieving the evidence of P.W.1 that she had sustained injury in
that accident, for which, P.W.8 has issued the certificate.
3.The learned counsel for the claimant/appellant would
contend that in view of the absence of the document given by the
Government Doctor, immediately after the accident to the
Investigation Officer, Accident Register Copies were marked before
the Criminal Court. Hence the same could not be marked before
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and an opportunity has to be
granted to the claim Petitioner, without prejudice to the examination
by the Insurance Company.
4.In the interest of justice, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
allowed and the order made in M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2009, dated
30.3.2011, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Fast
Track Court No.I), Tirunelveli is set aside and the matter is remitted
back to the Tribunal and the Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Tirunelveli is directed to take up the M.C.O.P on file and give an
opportunity to the claim Petitioner to conduct the case afresh,
subject to the cross-examination by the Insurance Company and
dispose of the same within a period of six months from the date of
3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the
appellant/claim petitioner is not entitled for any interest for the
appeal period pending before this Court,if any award is made by the
Tribunal. No costs.
15.03.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
vsn
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of
the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant
concerned.
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(Fast Track Court No.I),
Tirunelveli.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.
vsn JUDGMENT MADE IN C.M.A(MD)No.1198 of 2014 15.03.2022 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis