Insurance firms told to pay Rs 7.7L to rly contractor

The petition was filed by G Chandrasekaran, a resident of Periyar Nagar in Chennai under Section 166 Motor Vehicles Act, and Rule 3 of TNMACT Rules, claiming compensation of Rs 40 lakh.

Chandrasekaran was travelling in a car when a tractor allegedly driven in a rash and negligent manner by S Boopathi, rammed into it on February 18, 2011, near Tirumalpur railway gate. Chandrasekaran suffered injuries and was admitted to Government Hospitalin Arakkonam.

He contended that Future General Insurance India, the insurer of the tractor, and United India Insurance Company Ltd, the insurer of the car, were jointly and statutorily liable to pay him the compensation.

Countering this, Future General Insurance submitted that accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent act of the car driver.

“The compensation claimed by the petitioner is highly speculative, excessive, inflated and baseless, and it should not be allowed,” it said in the counter. The United India Insurance submitted that as per the averments by the petitioner, the accident had occurred due to the negligent act of the tractor driver and the compensation claimed by the Chandrasekaran was speculative and baseless.

Recording the submissions, Judge V Sutha said, “The rash negligent act of the tractor driver is fixed at 70 per cent and driver of the car is fixed at 30 per cent. Therefore, the petitioner entitled to compensation of Rs 7,74,700, and both of the firms will pay theirshare respectively.