HC sets aside order of Motor accidents claims tribunal

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Jun 25 2014 | 10:48 PM IST
: Madras High Court has set aside the awards passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes) here to family members of two accident victims and imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 each on them for filing bogus claims.
"On evaluation of the pleadings and evidence, this court is of the view that bogus claims have been made by the claimants and the same ought to have been rejected by the Tribunal," Justice S Manikumar said on June 17 last.
Going through all records and the report of C Vijayakumar, Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram District, he said court felt the claimants, who played a fraud on the court are not entitled to any equitable relief.The Tribunal has committed an error in fastening the liability on United India Insurance Company, Royapettah branch, by not appreciating the evidence in proper perspective, the judge added.
He set aside the judgment and decrees made by the Tribunal on August 30, 2011, allowed the appeal from the insurance company and dismissed the appeals from the victims' family to enhance the award amounts.
The judge also permitted the insurance company to withdraw the award money deposited in favour of the claimants by making necessary applications before the Claims Tribunal.
The case was there was a collision between a motorbike and autorikshaw, resulting in deaths of the bike and pillion rider at Maraimalai Nagar on July 9, 2005. Families of the victims filed separate claims before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, which despite objection and charge that the claims are bogus, awarded Rs 7.28 lakh and Rs 7.32 lakh to the claimants.
Contending that the award money was too low, the claimants filed appeals. The insurance company also filed an appeal challenging the award. It contended it was a hit and run case and the autorikshaw was not at all involved in it.
Relying on the medical report, it argued that the tyre of the autorikshaw could not have caused the death of the bike rider. It also alleged that the inspector who investigated the case, had colluded with the claimants and implicated the auto and fabricated evidence.
Finding force in the submissions of the insurance firm, Justice Manikumar dismissed claimants' appeals and allowed the appeals from the insurance company.
He also pulled up the Tribunal for not listening to the submissions of the insurance company. After going through the records and evidence, the judge found the claims were bogus, filed with the active connivance of the investigating officer of the accident case for monetary gain.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jun 25 2014 | 10:48 PM IST

Next Story