{"id":61182,"date":"2006-04-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-04-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006"},"modified":"2014-11-24T03:26:00","modified_gmt":"2014-11-23T21:56:00","slug":"the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","title":{"rendered":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 18\/04\/2006\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN\n\n\nC.M.A.No.621 of 1997\nand\nCross Objection No.33 of 2002\n\n\nThe New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,\nDivisional Office, represented by\nDivisional Manager,\n242-B,Kamarajar Salai,\nMadurai.\t\t\t...\t\tAppellant\n\nVs\n\n1.M.Sakthivel\n2.S.P.Muthurajan\t\t...\t\tRespondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the\njudgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.6 of 1995, dated 29.10.1996, on the file\nof the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - Additional District and Sessions Court,\nRamanathapuram.\n\n\n!For Appellant    \t...\tMr.A.K.Baskarapandian\n\n\n^For Respondents  \t...\tMr.S.Natarajan\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
\tThis appeal has been preferred against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.6 of
\n1995, dated 29.10.1996, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal –
\nAdditional District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram.  The claimant in
\nM.C.O.P.No.6 of 1995 has preferred Cross Objection No.33 of 2002.
\nThe short facts of the case relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal are
\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t2. On 12.04.1992, at about 07.00 a.m., while the claimant was riding his
\nbicycle near Sri Nithyakalyani Textile Mills Gate on the Thiruvadanai –
\nDevakottai main road, a van bearing Registration No.TCA-3215, belonging to the
\nfirst respondent, was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner,
\ndashed against the claimant causing grievous injuries on the right leg and right
\nknee.  The claimant was taken to the Government Hospital, Ramanathapuram where
\nhe was admitted as an inpatient from 12.04.1992 to 10.06.1992 and was admitted
\nin the Institute of Orthopaedic Research and Accident Surgery at K.K.Nagar,
\nMadurai as an inpatient from 07.05.1993 to 02.07.1993.  An operation was
\nconducted on 12.05.1993 on his right leg and steel plates were fixed to set
\nright the fractured bone.  The claimant was earning Rs.1,200\/- per mensum as a
\nlabourer in Sri Nithyakalyani Textile Mills.  The claimant had filed a claim
\napplication claiming Rs.3 lakhs towards compensation.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. The first respondent remained ex-parte.  The second respondent in his
\ncounter has contended that the accident had not occurred due to the rash and
\nnegligent driving of the driver of the van bearing Registration No.TCA-3215, but
\nonly due to the contributory negligence of the claimant, the accident had
\noccurred.   The second respondent in his additional counter has contended that
\nthe claim of compensation is exorbitant.\n<\/p>\n
\t4. Before the learned Tribunal, P.W.1 to P.W.3 were examined and Exs.P.1
\nto P.22 were marked on the side of the claimant and on the side of the
\nrespondent, neither oral nor documentary evidence was let in.\n<\/p>\n
\t5. After going through the available evidence, the learned Tribunal has
\ncome to a conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and
\nnegligent driving of the driver of the van bearing Registration No.TCA-3215 and
\nhas awarded Rs.1,40,000\/- towards compensation.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. Aggrieved by the award of compensation, the second respondent \/ New
\nIndia Assurance Company Limited has preferred this appeal in C.M.A.No.621 of
\n1997 and the claimant has preferred Cross Objection No.33 of 2002, contending
\nthat the learned Tribunal has failed to award a compensation of Rs.8,835.85
\nunder Ex.P.14 and that the award passed under the head pain and sufferings is
\nmeagre and the learned Tribunal has not considered the medical expenses to be
\nincurred in future for removing the steel plates already fixed in the right leg
\nof the claimant and the learned Tribunal has failed to award any compensation
\nunder the head extra nourishment and transportation charges and the interest
\nawarded is also low.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. Now, the points for determination in this appeal are:\n<\/p>\n
\t1. Whether the award passed  in M.C.O.P.No.6 of 1995, dated 29.10.1996, on
\nthe file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal – Additional District and
\nSessions Court, Ramanathapuram, is liable to be reduced for the reasons stated
\nin the Memorandum of appeal in C.M.A.No.621 of 1997?\n<\/p>\n
\t2. Whether more compensation is to be awarded under medical bills,
\nEx.P.14, under the heads pain and sufferings, future medical expenses, extra
\nnourishment and transportation charges for the reasons stated in Cross Objection
\nNo.33 of 2002?\n<\/p>\n
Point No.1<\/p>\n
\t8. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that the
\nlearned Tribunal while assessing the loss of income has fixed the monthly income
\nof the claimant as Rs.1,200\/- and has adopted multiplier 18 and after deducting
\n40% has arrived at the total loss of income as Rs.1,03,680\/- which is erroneous.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. As held by this Court in United India Insurance Company Limited vs.
\nVeluchamy and<\/a> another reported in 2005 (1) TN MAC 87 (DB), that for a permanent
\ndisability of 49%, this Court has awarded Rs.50,000\/- towards compensation under
\nthe head permanent disability.  The relevant observation in the above said
\ndictum runs as follows:\n<\/p>\n
“According to him, it would be difficult for him to sit, stand or attend to the
\nnature’s call and there is a possibility of the injury being worsened and also
\ngot further damaged in the operated portion.  Ultimately, he assessed his
\ndisability to the extent of 49 per cent.  The disability certificate has been
\nmarked as Ex.P.8 and X-ray as Ex.P.9….\n<\/p>\n
\tIn view of the fact that he sustained disability to the extent of 49 per
\ncent, as seen from Ex.P.8, as well as the evidence of P.W.2, we grant
\nRs.50,000\/- for permanent disability….\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the light of our discussion, the claimant is entitled to the following
\namounts for the heads noted against them:<\/p>\n
\n 1) For permanent\n     disability - 49%\t        Rs.50,000.00\"\n\n<\/pre>\n
\t10. In New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. R.Loganathan and others
\nreported in 2005 ACJ 1393, a Division Bench of this Court has held that on the
\nbasis of disability certificate, Ex.P.18, in that case, for a disability of 20%,
\nthe claimant was given an award of Rs.20,000\/-.  The relevant observation in the
\nsaid dictum is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t“The learned Counsel for the cross-objector by pointing out the evidence
\nof P.W.1, P.W.2 and disability certificate, Ex.P.18, would contend that the
\nTribunal ought to have granted separate amount for permanent disability.  In the
\nlight of the fact that the doctor has assessed his disability to an extent of 20
\nper cent, we are of the view that the claimant is entitled to a sum of
\nRs.20,000\/- towards the same.”\n<\/p>\n
\t11. In this case, the claimant had sustained a grievous injury on the
\nright leg which is seen from Ex.P.6, Accident Register.  The Doctor, P.W.2, who
\nhad examined the claimant and conducted the surgery, had issued Ex.P.15,
\ndisability certificate, wherein he has assessed the permanent disability as 40%.
\nThere was no amputation and hence the method adopted by the learned Tribunal is
\nerroneous as decided by this Court in the above said ratios.  The learned
\nTribunal ought to have fixed the compensation for 40% permanent disability of
\nthe claimant as Rs.40,000\/- as rightly contended by the learned Counsel
\nappearing for the appellant.  The claimant is entitled to Rs.40,000\/- for 40%
\npermanent disability.  The claimant was in the hospital as an inpatient from
\n12.04.1992 to 10.06.1992 and also from 07.05.1993 to 27.05.1993 as per Ex.P.2
\nand Ex.P.16.  As per Ex.P.11, salary certificate, the claimant is drawing a
\nsalary of Rs.1,209\/- per mensum.  The claimant was working as a daily wager in
\nSri Nithyakalyani Textile Mills Limited.  Admittedly, he was in the hospital as
\nan inpatient for nearly two months and twenty days.  So, under the head, loss of
\nincome, the claimant is entitled to Rs.3,200\/- towards compensation.  On the
\nbasis of the medical bills, Ex.P.7, Ex.P.9, Ex.P.10, Ex.P.20 to Ex.P.22, the
\nlearned Tribunal has awarded Rs.13,466.65.  Ex.P.14, medical receipts were
\nrejected by the learned Tribunal on the ground that they do not contain neither
\nthe name of the Doctor who had prescribed the medicines nor the patient’s name
\nfor whom the medicines were purchased.  Apart from that, there is a manipulation
\nin the date of issue of those medical bills.  I do not find any reason to
\ninterfere with the finding of the learned Tribunal in rejecting Ex.P.14, medical
\nbills.\n<\/p>\n
\t12. Under the head pain and sufferings, the learned Tribunal has awarded
\nRs.5,000\/- which is reasonable.  Under the head transport to hospital, the
\nlearned Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,253.35, but this was not based on any bills.
\nThe accident had occurred at Thiruvadanai – Devakottai main road near his
\nworking place, namely, Sri Nithyakalyani Textile Mills, from there he was taken
\nto the Government Hospital, Ramanathapuram.  So, even if the claimant would have
\nengaged a taxi to go to the Government Hospital, Ramanathapuram and then to
\nMadurai where he had taken treatment from 07.05.1993 to 27.05.1993 in a private
\nNursing Home, and then to his home, certainly he would have incurred a sum of
\nRs.2,000\/- towards taxi hire charges.  Hence, I award Rs.2,000\/- as compensation
\nunder the head transport to hospital.  The learned Tribunal has not awarded any
\ncompensation under the head damages to cloth and articles.  At the time of the
\naccident, the claimant was riding on his bicycle to his working place.  So in
\nthe accident, the bicycle as well as his clothes would have got damaged.  On
\nthat score, I award Rs.1,000\/- towards compensation.  The claimant was in the
\nhospital as an inpatient for nearly two months and twenty days and he had
\nsustained a grievous injury in the right leg and it is in evidence that the
\nsurgery was conducted and plates were fixed to set right the fractured bone on
\nthe right leg.  So, taking into consideration all the grievous injuries the
\nclaimant had sustained and also the treatment he had taken as an inpatient in
\nthe hospital, Ramanathapuram as well as in the private nursing home at Madurai
\nand during the stay at hospital, certainly the claimant would have taken
\nnutritious diet to regain his stamina and vitality, so I award Rs.4,000\/- under
\nthe head extra nourishment.   During his stay in the hospital for two months and
\ntwenty days as an inpatient, he would have engaged an assistant to help him.
\nHence under the head for providing an assistant, I award Rs.3,000\/-.  The
\nDoctor, P.W.2, in his evidence, has stated that the plates and screws fixed
\nduring the surgery are to be removed by conducting another surgery and for that
\nthe claimant has to incur a sum of Rs.10,000\/-.  But the learned Tribunal has
\nnot awarded any amount towards compensation under the head future medical
\nexpenses.  Hence, I award Rs.10,000\/- towards compensation under the head future
\nmedical expenses.  So, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of
\nRs.81,666.65 (Rs.40,000\/- + Rs.3,200\/- + Rs.13,466.65 + Rs.5,000\/- + Rs.2,000\/-
\n+ Rs.1,000\/- + Rs.4,000\/- + Rs.3,000\/- + Rs.10,000\/- = Rs.81,666.65) [Rupees
\nEighty One Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Six and paise sixty five] only.\n<\/p>\n
\t13. Hence, I hold on the point No.1 that the award of compensation passed
\nin M.C.O.P.No.6 of 1995, dated 29.10.1996, on the file of the Motor Accidents
\nClaims Tribunal – Additional District and Sessions Court, Ramanathapuram, is
\nliable to be reduced and fixed as Rs.81,666.65 for the reasons stated in the
\nMemorandum of appeal in C.M.A.621 of 1997.\n<\/p>\n
Point No:2<\/p>\n
\t14. In the Cross Objection, the learned Counsel for the claimant would
\nstate that without any basis, the learned Tribunal has rejected Ex.P.14, medical
\nbills.  But, the learned Tribunal has given reasons in the award for having
\nrejected Ex.P.14, medical bills.  The reason is that the medical bills under
\nEx.P.14, do not contain the name of the Doctor or the name of the patient.
\nApart from that the date has also been manipulated, and further they are not
\nrelating to the period under which the claimant was taking treatment in the
\nhospital as an inpatient and most of those bills are relating to the month of
\nOctober, November and December’1992 and January 1993 whereas the claimant was
\nunder the treatment during April to June’1992 and May ‘1993. So, the learned
\nTribunal has correctly rejected Ex.P.14, medical bills.  The learned Tribunal
\nhas fixed the compensation for pain and sufferings as Rs.5,000\/- as per Second
\nSchedule to Section 163 (A) of the Motor Vehicles Act [in Paragraph 4 under the
\nGeneral Damages in case of injuries and disabilities: i) pain and sufferings (a)
\ngrievous injuries –\n<\/p>\n
Rs.5,000\/-].  For future medical expenses, even though the learned Tribunal has
\ndiscussed it at paragraph 9, he has failed to award any compensation under the
\nhead future medical expenses.  Now, in the appeal, C.M.A.621 of 1997, we have
\nawarded Rs.10,000\/- towards compensation under the head future medical expenses.
\nFor extra nourishment and for transportation charges to hospital, in the appeal
\nwe have awarded compensation.  The learned Tribunal has correctly awarded 12%
\ninterest, taking into consideration the prevailing R.B.I rate of interest in the
\nyear 1992.  So, in the Cross Objection, the claimant is not entitled to get any
\ncompensation under Ex.P.14, medical bills and also for the enhancement of the
\nrate of interest.  In other aspects, the compensation has been awarded under the
\nhead pain and sufferings, future medical expenses, extra nourishment and
\ntransport charges to the hospital in C.M.A.No.621 of 1997.  The point No.2 is
\nanswered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\t15. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the award of compensation
\npassed in M.C.O.P.No.6 of 1995, dated 29.10.1996, on the file of the Motor
\nAccidents Claims Tribunal – Additional District and Sessions Court,
\nRamanathapuram, is reduced and fixed as Rs.81,666.65 rounded to Rs.81,667\/-
\n(Rupees Eighty One Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Seven) only.  Cross Objection
\nNo.33 of 2002 is partly allowed as above. The claimant has already been
\npermitted to withdraw Rs.70,000\/- from the award amount as per order in
\nC.M.P.No.51 of 1998 and C.M.P.No.6221 of 1997 in C.M.A.No.621 of 1997, dated
\n06.02.1998.  The balance of the award amount with accrued interest in to be
\ndeposited in any one of the nationalised banks for one year.  The claimant is
\npermitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months from the above
\nsaid fixed deposit amount.  The appellant is permitted to withdraw the
\ndifference of the award amount with proportionate interest and costs.  No costs
\nin C.M.A and Cross Objection.\n<\/p>\n
rsb<\/p>\n
To
\nThe Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal –\n<\/p>\n
Additional District and Sessions Court,
\nRamanathapuram.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18\/04\/2006 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN C.M.A.No.621 of 1997 and Cross Objection No.33 of 2002 The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Divisional Office, represented by Divisional Manager, 242-B,Kamarajar Salai, Madurai. […]<\/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-61182","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-11-23T21:56:00+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-23T21:56:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\"},\"wordCount\":2279,\"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\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\",\"name\":\"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-23T21:56:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-11-23T21:56:00+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006","datePublished":"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-23T21:56:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006"},"wordCount":2279,"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\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006","name":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-04-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-23T21:56:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-new-india-assurance-co-vs-m-sakthivel-on-18-april-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The New India Assurance Co. vs M.Sakthivel on 18 April, 2006"}]},{"@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\/61182","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=61182"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61182\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61182"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61182"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61182"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}