{"id":236772,"date":"2010-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010"},"modified":"2018-12-21T07:40:23","modified_gmt":"2018-12-21T02:10:23","slug":"ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDated: 08\/04\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN\n\nC.M.A.(MD)No.767 of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.3 of 2009\n\nM\/s National Insurance Company Limited,\nthrough its Branch Manager,\nVigneswara Building,\n2\/7 Pudukottai Road,\nTrichy-20.\t\t              ... Appellant \/ 2nd Respondent\n\nVs\n\n1. P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar\n       \t\t\t              ... Respondent\/Petitioner\n\n2. R.Sundar\t\t              ... Respondent\/ 1st Respondent\n\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\njudgment and decree order  made in M.C.O.P.No.935 of 2003 dated 20.03.2008, on\nthe file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast\nTrack Court, Trichy.\n\t\n!For Appellant    ... Ms.P.Malini\n^For Respondents  ... Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth\n\t\t      for R.1\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 judgment and decree order  made in M.C.O.P.No.935 of 2003 dated 20.03.2008,<br \/>\non the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge,<br \/>\nFast Track Court, Trichy.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The appellant is the insurer of the vehicle owned by the second<br \/>\nrespondent.  The first respondent rode a two wheeler on 29.04.2002 on<br \/>\nBharathithasan salai in front of P.L.A. petrol bunk. At that time the two<br \/>\nwheeler owned by the second respondent dashed against him and he received<br \/>\ngrievous injuries.  According to the first respondent, the accident was due to<br \/>\nthe rash and negligent driving of the person who rode the two wheeler of the<br \/>\nsecond respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The first respondent filed M.C.O.P.No.935 of 2003 claiming a sum of<br \/>\nRs.3,00,000\/- as compensation.  Before the Tribunal, besides examining himself<br \/>\nas a witness, the claimant examined the doctor who gave a disability<br \/>\ncertificate.  Exs. P.1 to P.5 were marked on his side. On the side of the<br \/>\nInsurance Company, one witness was examined and Exs.R.1 and R.2 were marked.<br \/>\nThe Tribunal passed an award dated 20.03.2008 granting Rs.47,000\/- as<br \/>\ncompensation with 7.5% interest and costs.  The appeal is preferred by the<br \/>\nInsurance Company against the said order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. Heard Ms.P.Malini, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr.B.Prasanna<br \/>\nVinoth, learned Counsel for the first respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. The learned Counsel for the appellant strenuously contends that the<br \/>\nvehicle that was insured with the appellant, did not involve in any accident.<br \/>\nThe claimant skidded himself and got injured and made a false claim against the<br \/>\nappellant Insurance Company.   The learned Counsel proceeds further that when<br \/>\nthe accident took place on 29.04.2002, the claimant lodged F.I.R. on 30.08.2002<br \/>\nafter four months.  It is also submitted that he did not prosecute the matter<br \/>\nfurther and the criminal prosecution was stopped. Hence it should be taken that<br \/>\nno accident took place.  However, the Tribunal erroneously came to the<br \/>\nconclusion that the vehicle insured with the appellant involved in the accident.<br \/>\nThe learned Counsel also submits that in Ex.P.3, the hospital record, it is<br \/>\nstated that the injury was caused due to the fall.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the claimant submits that<br \/>\nthere is no infirmity in the award and the Tribunal after taking into account<br \/>\nthe oral evidence of the claimant, who was an eye-witness to the accident, came<br \/>\nto the conclusion that the vehicle insured with the appellant involved in the<br \/>\naccident.  It is submitted that the delay in filing of F.I.R. and the closing of<br \/>\ncriminal prosecution could not come in the way of proceedings before the Motor<br \/>\nAccident Claims Tribunal.  The learned Counsel for the claimant also relies on<br \/>\nthe judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Pallavan Transport<br \/>\nCorporation Vs. Saroj Goyal  reported in 2001-2-L.W.292.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the<br \/>\nrecords.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. The learned Counsel for the appellant questions only the liability.<br \/>\nAccording to the appellant, the vehicle that was insured with the appellant did<br \/>\nnot involve in the accident at all.  According to the appellant, the accident<br \/>\ntook place due to the skidding of the two wheeler that was ridden by the<br \/>\nclaimant.  The following is the pleadings of the appellant before the Tribunal.<br \/>\n&#8220;The real reason for the alleged accident is the sudden skid of the petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nvehicle on his careless, negligent  and rash driving only to invite the skidding<br \/>\nand consequent stated injuries.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. On the other hand, the claimant pleaded as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;the injured petitioner Mr.Gunaseelan (A) Rajasekar was riding his motor cycle<br \/>\nTVS MAX 100, proceeding from his extreme left side of the Bharathidasan Salai<br \/>\ninfront of PL.A. petrol bunk.  At that time the vehicle TVS Scooty bearing<br \/>\nRegistration No.TN-45-Q-6611, belonging to the first respondent, driven by its<br \/>\ndriver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the above said motor<br \/>\ncycle TVS MAX 100.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. In support of his claim, the injured deposed before the Tribunal.  He<br \/>\ncategorically deposed in conformity with  the  statement made in his petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. On the other hand, the appellant did not let in any evidence to<br \/>\nestablish his defence that the accident took place due to the skidding of his<br \/>\nown vehicle.  R.W.1, examined on the side of the appellant, was its employee and<br \/>\nhe was not an eye-witness.  He deposed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;1-k; vjph;kDjhuh; thfdBkh my;yJ BtW vt;tpj thfdKk; te;J Bkhjp tpgj;J Vw;gLj;jhj<br \/>\nfhuzj;jpdhy;jhd; kDjhuh; bgl;Buhy; gA;fpypUe;J Buhow;F jpUk;g[k;BghJ rWf;fp<br \/>\ntpGe;jjpy; Vw;gl;l fhaA;fspdhy; Ra epidt[ nHe;J kaf;fkile;J fple;jBghJ mUfpy;<br \/>\nnUe;j xUth;, mUfpy; nUe;j kUj;Jtkidapy; Brh;f;Fk;BghJ tz;oapypUe;J tpGe;J<br \/>\ntpl;lij Twp, mJ tpgj;J Fwpg;Bgl;oy; cs;sJ.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. That is, the appellant admitted that there was an accident on<br \/>\n29.04.2002 and that the injured became unconscious and that he was taken to<br \/>\nhospital and was treated as inpatient.  However, R.W.1 deposed that in the<br \/>\naccident register, it is stated that the accident took place due to the skid of<br \/>\nhis own vehicle.  When R.W.1 made such a statement it was for him to produce the<br \/>\naccident register and to establish his case.  But the accident register was not<br \/>\nproduced.  On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the appellant blames the<br \/>\nclaimant for not producing the accident register.  When there is no contra<br \/>\nevidence let in by the appellant contradicting the evidence of the claimant, who<br \/>\nwas en eye-witness to the accident, the Tribunal could not be found fault for<br \/>\nrecording its finding that there was an accident involving the vehicle insured<br \/>\nwith the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. The learned Counsel for the appellant strenuously contends that there<br \/>\nwas delay of 4 months in lodging F.I.R. and that the prosecution did not proceed<br \/>\nfurther as the complainant did not pursue the matter.  According to her, this<br \/>\ncircumstance would establish that the vehicle that was insured with the<br \/>\nappellant did not involve in the accident.  I am not able to agree with the<br \/>\nsubmission made by the learned Counsel for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. Even assuming that no F.I.R. was lodged or F.I.R. was lodged belatedly<br \/>\nthat could not be decisive  to come to the conclusion that no accident took<br \/>\nplace involving the vehicle insured with the appellant.  The judgment of the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of this Court in  Pallavan Transport Corporation Vs. Saroj Goyal<br \/>\nreported in 2001-2-L.W.292 relied on by the learned Counsel for the claimant<br \/>\nsquarely applies to this case.  Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the above said judgment<br \/>\nare extracted hereunder:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;7&#8230;.Though we have observed that the claimants failed to place first<br \/>\ninformation report, sketch relating to the scene of accident, in as much as the<br \/>\nAccidents Claims Tribunal must take special care to see that innocent victims<br \/>\ndid not suffer and owners and drivers do not escape liability merely because of<br \/>\nsome doubt here and there, culpability must be inferred from the circumstances<br \/>\nwhere it is fairly reasonable.  As observed by their Lordships of the Supreme<br \/>\nCourt in N.K.V.Bros.(p) Ltd. Vs. M.Karumai Ammal (1980 ACJ 435 (SC), the Court<br \/>\nshould not succumb to niceties, technicalities and mystic maybes.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. Likewise, merely because the eye witness did not inform the police nor made<br \/>\nany specific complaint it did not diminish his statement before the Court<br \/>\nregarding the manner of accident.  If the evidence of the said witness is<br \/>\ncogent, natural and probable, even in the absence of the fact that he did not<br \/>\ninform the police regarding the manner of accident, it can safely be accepted.<br \/>\nIn this regard learned Counsel appearing for the claimants very much relied upon<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1173636\/\">Natchathiram and others V. Jayasekaran and others<\/a> (2000) ACJ 902.  The learned<br \/>\nJudge in a similar circumstance has held,<br \/>\n\t&#8220;10&#8230; The mere fact that he has not given any complaint to the police<br \/>\nwill not diminish the credibility of the witness to any extent as observed by<br \/>\nthe tribunal&#8230;.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>We are in agreement with the view expressed by the learned judge&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15. Further the Tribunal enquiring to the claims arising out of road<br \/>\naccidents cannot decide the matter on technicalities.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t16. In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the award of<br \/>\nthe Tribunal.  Since the only issue raised by the appellant in the appeal is<br \/>\nthat the vehicle insured with them did not involve in the accident and no other<br \/>\nissue was raised, the appeal fails.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t17. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.<br \/>\nConsequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>ssl<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,<br \/>\nAdditional District Judge,<br \/>\nFast Track Court, Trichy.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 08\/04\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN C.M.A.(MD)No.767 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2009 M\/s National Insurance Company Limited, through its Branch Manager, Vigneswara Building, 2\/7 Pudukottai Road, Trichy-20. &#8230; Appellant [&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-236772","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>M\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 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\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-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=\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-21T02:10:23+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\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-21T02:10:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1485,\"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\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-21T02:10:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 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":"M\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 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\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-21T02:10:23+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\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-21T02:10:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010"},"wordCount":1485,"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\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010","name":"M\/S National Insurance Company ... vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-21T02:10:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-national-insurance-company-vs-p-k-s-gunaseelan-rajasekar-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S National Insurance Company &#8230; vs P.K.S.Gunaseelan @ Rajasekar on 8 April, 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\/236772","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=236772"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236772\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236772"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236772"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236772"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}