Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.Mohan Ram, J.,) Being aggrieved by the award, dated 15.12.2009, passed in MACT OP No.3587 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (II Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai, the insurer has filed CMA No.918 of 2010. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed CMA No.1235 of 2010.

2. In respect of the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road accident that took place on 19.07.2007 involving the motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN07-AT-7191 belonging to the claimant and the Tata Sumo Car bearing Registration No.TN22-AT-6685 belonging to the first respondent in CMA No.918 of 2010, the claimant has filed the aforesaid OP claiming a total compensation of Rs.56,00,000/- under various heads.

8. As stated above, both the claimant as well as the insurer have filed the above appeals.

9. Pending appeals and after the appeals were heard-in-part, the claimant, who is the appellant in CMA No.1235 of 2010 has filed M.P.No.1 of 2012 in CMA No.1235 of 2010 under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure to receive the following documents as additional evidence, namely, "(i) Xerox copy of the Bank of Maharashtra, Neelankarai Branch, Chennai 600 041 passbook.

(ii) Discharge summary issued by Sri Ramachandra Medical Centre, Porur, Chennai 600 116 (03-11-2011 to 05-11-2011).

31. In our considered view, the award passed by the Tribunal cannot be considered to be a reasoned award and the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal appears to be not acquainted with the relevant case laws on this subject. Her appreciation of evidence, discussion and the conclusions reached are totally not satisfactory. Hence, we direct the Registry to place this order before My Lord, The Hon 'ble The Chief Justice, for making appropriate entry in her annual confidential report.

32. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal filed by the claimant in CMA No.1235 of 2010 is dismissed and the appeal filed by the insurer in CMA No.918 of 2010 is partly allowed. However there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected MP No.1 of 2010 is closed.

33. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the insurer submitted that a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- has been deposited to the credit of MACTC OP No.3587 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Judge, Court of Small Causes) at Chennai and therefore submitted that the insurer / appellant in CMA No.918 of 2010, who is also the second respondent in CMA No.1235 of 2010, is permitted to withdraw the excess amount deposited.

34. In view of the same, the balance amount, after satisfying the award passed herein, is permitted to be withdrawn by the Insurance Company / the appellant in CMA No.918 of 2010. If the claimant has not withdrawn the amount or has only withdrawn a part of the amount, he is entitled to withdraw the balance amount.