Madras High Court
Seethalakshmi vs P.Sakthivel on 3 April, 2019
Author: S.Ramathilagam
Bench: S.Ramathilagam
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.04.2019
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.RAMATHILAGAM
C.M.P.(MD) No.2926 of 2019
in
CMA(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018
and
C.M.A.(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018
in C.M.P.(MD) No.2926 of 2019
1.Seethalakshmi
2.Harikrishnan
... Petitioners
vs.
1.P.Sakthivel
2.National Insurance Company Ltd.,
1st Floor, 1631-1/B,
Salem-Bhavani Main Road,
Sangagiri,
Salem.
3.G.Ramarathinam
... Respondents
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 173 (1) of
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, to accept the cause title by representing as
the second petitioner is the major in the above said Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudhagar Nagaraj
in C.M.A.(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
1.Seethalakshmi
2.Harikrishnan
... Appellants
vs.
1.P.Sakthivel
2.National Insurance Company Ltd.,
1st Floor, 1631-1/B,
Salem-Bhavani Main Road,
Sangagiri,
Salem.
3.G.Ramarathinam
... Respondents
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to modify the judgment and decree dated
05.07.2018 in M.C.O.P.No.307 of 2012 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Kulithalai and seeking
enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,25,000/-.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudhagar Nagaraj
ORDER
The Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to accept the cause title by representing the second petitioner as major in the above said appeal.
2.C.M.A.(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018 has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2018 passed in M.C.O.P.No.307 of http://www.judis.nic.in 3 2012 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Kulithalai and seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs. 3,25,000/-.
3.On perusal of the claim application, it is observed that the petitioners claimed compensation for the death of one Ganesarathinam. The Tribunal after analyzing the details furnished by the petitioners has awarded compensation only for the first petitioner, namely, Seethalakshmi since the second petitioner was minor and hence, the above said miscellaneous appeal.
4.At the time of filing the claim application, the second petitioner was a minor. Now, he attained the age of majority. Since no award has been passed to the second petitioner/minor, the above said appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the award amount, which was awarded by the Tribunal to the first petitioner.
5.In view of the above, the purpose of filing the above said appeal is not genuine and unnecessary one and as per the claim made in the claim application and also the discussion made by the Tribunal, this Court finds that the second petitioner is not a necessary party. Hence, in the absence of any details furnished by the second http://www.judis.nic.in 4 S.RAMATHILAGAM, J.
mm petitioner, how the second petitioner, who was not given any award by the Tribunal has been made as a party in the said C.M.A., and also asking for accepting the cause title by stating that the second petitioner as major. Hence, there is no necessity to allow this Civil Miscellaneous Petition based on the fact that the second petitioner is major, since the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed for enhancement of the compensation that was awarded to the first petitioner alone.
6.Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. Consequently, C.M.A.(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018 is also rejected at the SR stage itself.
Index : Yes / No 03.04.2019
Internet : Yes / No
mm
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Subordinate Judge, Kulithalai.
C.M.P.(MD) No.2926 of 2019
in CMA(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018 and C.M.A.(MD) No.SR49818 of 2018 http://www.judis.nic.in