Vijayaragan Mhc Advt: MCOP No.6699/2017- The claim was for Rs.88 lakhs for the death of 50 year old Mr. Sivalingam, employed as Foreman with TNEB. He was earning Rs.56,522/-p.m. as salary.
[5/12, 16:45] Vijayaragan Mhc Advt: MCOP No.6699/2017- The claim was for Rs.88 lakhs for the death of 50 year old Mr. Sivalingam, employed as Foreman with TNEB. He was earning Rs.56,522/-p.m. as salary. He met with the motor accident when he was riding a two wheeler 1/10/2017 on ECR Road, Mamallapuram, when he was knocked by Etios Tourist vehicle. On negotiations, the widow and 3 major children agreed to receive Rs,64,00,000/- in full quit. Though the parties were ad idem for a compromise, they could not get the same recorded in view of the national lockdown. Tapping into the orders dt.5/5/2020 made in a batch of 23 similar motor accidents claims, passed by the High Court, Royal Sundaram General Ins Co Ltd, insurer of the tourist vehicle approached the High Court for withdrawal of the claim from the claims tribunal and to record the compromise. Royal Sundaram offered to deposit the award amount in 2 weeks from the date of receipt of order copy.
The parties met on Viedoconferencing route on 12/5/2020.Royal Sundaram was represented by its State Head, TamilNadu Third Party claims. The claimants were represented by their counsel and the widow Ms. Annalakshi also appeared in person along with her counsel on the digital platform. Justice N Anand Venkatesh personally called upon the claimants as to whether they were agreeable for the compromise and whether the consent obtained by the advocate was true and they were agreeable for the same. On affirmation from the claimant widow and their advocate, the compromise was recorded in Tr.CMP 298/2020, and the insurance company was directed to deposit the award amount to the credit of the MCOP. The claimants were allotted separate shares and permitted to withdraw upon identification by the claims tribunal by their counsel. But for the inventive and innovative digital route hit upon by the Madras High Court in its widely reported and appreciated order, such a compromise may not have fructified in this critical situation. The purpose was to close the compromise reached. It may be easy to suggest that the compromise can wait for normalcy to return. No one knows when it will return. Times they are a changing. Closure today is worth huge for it gives closure. Law cannot throw up its hands or refuse to embrace the possible and permissible, on imagined pretexts. If satisfaction can be gleaned from legitimate and technological means, according it its due makes for robust common, practical and legal sense.
The personal appearance of the parties was accomplished by a digital route and consent obtained and recorded. Extraordinary times demand extraordinary remedies. The need for consent of parties, in person, was dispensed with. The personal appearance by replaced in a different manner. Consent of the victims was not given a go by. It was not replaced for consent of lawyer. Consent of claimants was obtained and affirmed. The digital route made it possible.
News in filtering from various insurers that they have all obtained the orders dt.5/5/2020 of Justice N Anand Venkatesh and even the records submitted by the counsel for insurer, to obtain the same, for replicating this example. Law has to yield to change and it needs to be accommodating and not be stifling when viral Pandemic’s spread is stifling enough. The claimants expressed their satisfaction and thanked the High Court for its initiative to render justice in these abnormal times. The claimants can get back on track without loss of time to get an agreed compromise recorded compromise for their lasting benefit.
[5/12, 16:48] Sekarreporter 1: 🍁
