{"id":179196,"date":"2010-03-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010"},"modified":"2016-08-10T00:24:43","modified_gmt":"2016-08-09T18:54:43","slug":"national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDated: 02\/03\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN\n\nC.M.A.(MD)No.786 of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2009\n\n\nNational Insurance Company Limited,\n3, North Veli Street,\nNear Setupathi School,\nMadurai -1, through its\nDivisional Manager.\t             ...  Appellant\/2nd Respondent\n\nVs\n\n\n1. S.Perumal\t\t... Respondent\/Petitioner\n2. K.Sureshkumar\t... Respondent\/1st Respondent\n\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeals filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\norder and decree  dated 23.04.2007 made in M.C.O.P.No.2417 of 2001 on the file\nof the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional Sub Court, Madurai.\n\n!For Appellant    ... Mr.S.Ramachandran\n^For Respondent   ... Mr.S.Ramesh @ Ramaiah\n\t\t      for R.1\n\t\n\t\t\t* * * * *\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThis Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant against<br \/>\nthe order and decree dated 23.04.2007 made in M.C.O.P.No.2417 of 2001 on the<br \/>\nfile of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal &#8211; II Additional Sub Court, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The appellant is the Insurance Company.  The first respondent in the<br \/>\nappeal is the claimant.  The claimant was a driver employed by the Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nState Transport Corporation, Madurai Division I, a Government of Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nundertaking.  On 24.08.2000, while he was driving a bus near Manimoortheeswaran<br \/>\nVilakku at Thachanaullur-Tirunelveli road, a lorry which was insured with the<br \/>\nappellant Insurance Company, bearing registration No.TN-72-C-6877, hit against<br \/>\nthe bus in direct collusion, while overtaking a Maruthi Car, which  resulted in<br \/>\nsevere injuries on the right leg of the claimant.  Many passengers also received<br \/>\ninjuries. The claimant was immediately admitted in Tirunelveli Medical College<br \/>\nHospital and he was there upto 25.08.2000 and thereafter, he was admitted as an<br \/>\ninpatient in Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai from 26.08.2000 to 05.09.2000.<br \/>\nHe took treatment as outpatient from one Dr.Muthuvel Rajan from 10.11.2000 to<br \/>\n20.03.2001.  Thereafter, he was admitted as an inpatient in Christian Hospital,<br \/>\nMadurai from 31.07.2001 to 18.08.2001 and a surgery was performed on the right<br \/>\nankle of the claimant in the said hospital.  In view of the accident, the<br \/>\nclaimant could not drive bus.  He could not climb stairs; he could not squat on<br \/>\nthe floor and he could not sit cross legged. The doctor certified that he<br \/>\nsuffered 33% permanent partial disability.  He was disqualified to drive bus.<br \/>\nThe Transport Corporation sent him before the Medical Board.  The Medical Board<br \/>\nfound him unfit to hold the post of driver.  Hence, he was removed vide order<br \/>\ndated 05.02.2002 from  service. From 24.08.2000 i.e. the date of accident, till<br \/>\n05.02.2002, he was not paid salary as he did not have medical leave to his<br \/>\ncredit. In these circumstances, he filed M.C.O.P.No.2417 of 2001 claiming<br \/>\nRs.15,00,000\/- as compensation.  Before the Tribunal the claimant examined four<br \/>\nwitnesses including himself and also marked documents Exs.P.1 to P.30. The<br \/>\nappellant herein did not examine any witness and also did not produce any<br \/>\ndocument.  The Tribunal passed an award dated 23.04.2007 awarding a sum of<br \/>\nRs.9,77,000\/- as compensation with 7.5% interest and costs.  The present appeal<br \/>\nis against the said order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. Heard the learned Counsel for both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.9,77,000\/- under the following heads:\n<\/p>\n<p>\ti)  for loss of income\t        Rs.8,50,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tii) for medical expenses\tRs.  60,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tiii)for pain and sufferings\tRs.  20,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tiv) for permanent disability\tRs.  23,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tv)  for loss of amenities\tRs.  10,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tvi) for transport expenses\tRs.   4,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\tvii)for extra nourishment\tRs.  10,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tRs.9,77,000\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that though he lost his<br \/>\nemployment as a driver in the Transport Corporation, he should have tried for an<br \/>\nalternative job with the Transport Corporation.  In any event, he submits that<br \/>\nsince he did not suffer 100% disability, he could perform some other duty and<br \/>\ntherefore, the Tribunal was not justified in granting a sum of Rs.8,50,000\/- as<br \/>\ncompensation for loss of earning.  Secondly, it is further submitted that when<br \/>\nRs.8,50,000\/- was awarded as compensation for loss of earning, the Tribunal was<br \/>\nnot justified in granting a sum of Rs.23,000\/- towards disability compensation.<br \/>\nThirdly, it is submitted that the loss of income, gratuity, bonus was arrived at<br \/>\nRs.12,00,000\/- by the Tribunal.  The Tribunal is not correct in taking<br \/>\nRs.12,00,000\/- as the loss of earning by the appellant due to the accident, for<br \/>\ngranting Rs.8,50,000\/- as compensation for loss of income.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal ought<br \/>\nto have applied a proper multiplier after deducting 1\/3rd from his monthly wages<br \/>\nthat he received at the time of the accident.  It is submitted that the claimant<br \/>\nreceived a sum of Rs.7,000\/- as wages at the time of accident.  As far as<br \/>\nmultiplier is concerned, the learned Counsel submits that the proper multiplier<br \/>\nshould be adopted, without mentioning what is the proper multiplier.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the claimant seeks to<br \/>\nsustain the award of the Tribunal.  It is submitted by the learned Counsel for<br \/>\nthe claimant that he could not be found fault for not seeking other employment.<br \/>\nIt is submitted that the Transport Corporation did not offer any alternate<br \/>\nemployment. It is stated that the claimant could not do any work than the<br \/>\ndriving work.  It is further submitted that the Transport Corporation owned by<br \/>\nthe Tamil Nadu State Government gave a certificate on 05.04.2002 stating that<br \/>\nthe loss of salary to the petitioner was Rs.10,42,164\/-, loss of bonus was<br \/>\nRs.22,500\/- and loss of gratuity was Rs.1,40,253\/-.  The Tribunal is justified<br \/>\nin acting on the  certificate issued by the Transport Corporation.  In fact, the<br \/>\nlearned Counsel submits that the claimant is entitled to more compensation.  It<br \/>\nis submitted that<\/p>\n<p>the amount given to him towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities, are<br \/>\nonly on the lower side.  Hence, he prays for non-interference by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. I have considered the submissions made on either side.  The learned<br \/>\nCounsel for the appellant does not dispute that the claimant lost the employment<br \/>\nas driver with Transport Corporation.  In fact, Ex.P.26 is the order dated<br \/>\n05.02.2002 removing the petitioner from service based on the report of the<br \/>\nMedical Board finding unfit to hold the post of the driver.  The learned Counsel<br \/>\nfor the appellant argues that he could do other jobs. On the other hand, the<br \/>\nclaimant examined himself and deposed categorically that he knew driving only<br \/>\nand he could not do the same due to the accident.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. Hence, the learned Counsel for the appellant is not correct in finding<br \/>\nfault with the claimant for not taking up any other employment for his<br \/>\nlivelihood and being satisfied with the pension amount of    Rs.1,999\/- as<br \/>\npension and the compensation amount as ordered by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. I am not in agreement with the submission, of the appellant, since the<br \/>\nCorporation issued a certificate dated 05.02.2002 and the same was marked as<br \/>\nEx.P.27 and also a Senior Assistant in the Corporation was examined as P.W.3.<br \/>\nAs per Ex.P.27, the claimant suffered loss in salary to the tune of<br \/>\nRs.10,42,864\/-, loss in bonus to the tune of Rs.22,500\/- and loss in gratuity to<br \/>\nthe tune of Rs.1,40,253\/- due to his loss of employment.  Hence, I do not find<br \/>\nany infirmity in the order of the Tribunal by deducting a sum of Rs.3,50,000\/-<br \/>\nand awarding a sum of Rs.8,50,000\/-towards loss of income.  Even otherwise, it<br \/>\nis admitted that the claimant was receiving a sum of Rs.7,000\/- as salary at the<br \/>\ntime of the accident.  As per the decision of the Apex Court in Sharla Varma<br \/>\ncase reported in 2009(4)MLJ 997, 1\/3rd of the salary has to be added towards<br \/>\nfuture prospects.  In the case of injury, no deduction could be made as per the<br \/>\nDivision Bench judgment of this Court held in  United India Insurance Company<br \/>\nLimited Vs. S.Saravanan and Another reported in 2009(2) TNMAC 103(DB).  Hence,<br \/>\nthe monthly loss of salary could be arrived at Rs.10,500(Rs.7000+Rs.3500). He<br \/>\nwas aged about 47 years at the time of the accident. As per Sharla Varma&#8217;s case<br \/>\nreported in 2009(4)MLJ 997, the proper multiplier is &#8220;13&#8221;. Even according to the<br \/>\nSchedule provided in Motor Vehicles Act, the proper multiplier is &#8220;13&#8221;. Even if<br \/>\nit is taken as &#8220;10&#8221; as multiplier, the compensation could be arrived at<br \/>\nRs.8,50,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the claimant that had<br \/>\nhe continued in service and retired on reaching the age of superannuation, he<br \/>\ncould have received a better pension.  This aspect was not taken note of by the<br \/>\nTribunal.  In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the order of<br \/>\nthe Tribunal for fixing a sum of Rs.8,50,000\/- towards loss of earning.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that when the Doctor<br \/>\ncertified that the claimant suffered 33% permanent partial disability, the<br \/>\nTribunal took it as 23% and awarded a sum of Rs.23,000\/- as compensation towards<br \/>\ndisability.  According to him, when loss of earning is compensated by awarding a<br \/>\nsum of Rs.8,50,000\/-, the Tribunal was not justified in awarding a sum of<br \/>\nRs.23,000\/- towards disability compensation.  On the other hand, the learned<br \/>\nCounsel for the claimant submits that it is not known as to why the Tribunal<br \/>\narrived at 23% disability when the Doctor&#8217;s certificate states that the claimant<br \/>\nsuffered 33% disability.  The learned Counsel for the claimant relies on the<br \/>\ndecision of a Division Bench of this Court reported in United India Insurance<br \/>\nCompany Limited Vs. Veluchamy and Another  reported in 2005(1) CTC 38 and<br \/>\nsubmits that there is nothing wrong in awarding disability compensation while<br \/>\nawarding for the loss of income.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. Since the amount involved is merely a sum of Rs.23,000\/- and as<br \/>\nrightly contended by the learned Counsel for the claimant that the amount<br \/>\nawarded in other heads namely pain and suffering, loss of amenities and<br \/>\ntransport charges are on lower side, I am not inclined to interfere with the<br \/>\naward of the Tribunal.  That is, even if Rs.23,000\/- awarded towards disability<br \/>\ncompensation is deleted, the claimant is entitled to enhanced amount towards<br \/>\n&#8220;pain and sufferings and loss of amenities and enjoyment of life&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. Accordingly the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently,<br \/>\nthe connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>ssl<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,<br \/>\nII Additional Sub Court, Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 02\/03\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN C.M.A.(MD)No.786 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2009 National Insurance Company Limited, 3, North Veli Street, Near Setupathi School, Madurai -1, through its Divisional Manager. &#8230; Appellant\/2nd Respondent [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179196","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1596,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\",\"name\":\"National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010"},"wordCount":1596,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010","name":"National Insurance Company ... vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-09T18:54:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-insurance-company-vs-s-perumal-on-2-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"National Insurance Company &#8230; vs S.Perumal on 2 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179196","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179196"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179196\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179196"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179196"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179196"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}