Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs S. Senthil Kumar on 18 August, 2021
CMA No.3224 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANAHAN
C.M.A. No. 3224 of 2008 and
M.P.No.1 of 2008
The Managing Director,
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation,
Karwar Depot,
Karnataka State ... Appellant
Vs.
S. Senthil Kumar, Son of Mr. Selvaraj,
Panagal Street, Kaveripatnam Post,
Krishnagiri Taluk,Dharmapuri District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act against the decree and judgment dated 13.07.2007
passed in M.C.O.P.No. 284 of 2003 by the Additional District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dharmapuri.
For Appellant : Mr. T. Thiyagarajan
For Respondent : No appearance
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the Award passed by the Tribunal, the
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Karwar Depot has filed
the present Appeal.
2. The claimant/ respondent has filed a claim petition
before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.7,00,000/- for the
injuries sustained by him in a road accident that occurred on
05.07.2002.
3. Brief case of the Respondent/claimant is as follows:
On 05.07.2002 at 9.15. a.m., while the claimant was driving a lorry
bearing registration No.KAO-1C-9297 from Gangavathi at Karnataka
State to Gangeyam in Tamil Nadu State and while nearing
Bramachandra Gate at National Highways, Sira Taluk, Karnataka, a
speedy bus bearing registration No.31/F-664 (KSRTC), belonging to
the Appellant Transport Corporation, coming from Bangalore to
Karwar, dashed against the lorry, due to which, the driver of the bus
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
died on the spot and 12 passengers sustained injuries. It is contended
that the claimant sustained injuries all over his body and he was
admitted in the Government Hospital at Sira and subsequently, he was
shifted to S.Palaniandi Mudaliar Memorial Hospital, for better
treatment. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the bus was the cause of accident and hence, the Appellant
Transport Corporation are liable to pay compensation to the claimant.
4. The Appellant/Transport Corporation resisted the claim
petition by filing a counter affidavit stating that, due to the negligent
driving of the driver of the lorry, the lorry and the bus had collided
with each other, and there was no negligence on the part of the driver of
the bus belonging to their Corporation. It is further contended that the
claimant has not driven the lorry and he was just travelling in the lorry
and that the Wound Certificate dated 18.07.2002 produced by him was
not obtained from the Government Hospital, Sira, but, it was obtained
from Palaniyandi Mudaliar Hospital, Salem, and hence that document is
denied. The contention of the appellant is that the owner and the
insurer of the lorry were not impleaded as parties in the claim petition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
and since the negligence is entirely on the part of the driver of the lorry,
the Appellant/Transport Corporation is not liable to pay compensation
to the claimant.
5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, the
claimant and two other witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW3 and
Exs.P1 to P8 were marked. On the side of the Transport Corporation,
no oral and documentary evidence were adduced.
6. After analysing the evidence on record, the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.65,497/- as compensation to the claimant with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Details of compensation
awarded under various heads are below.
Sl Heads Amount in
No Rs.
1 Permanent Disability 35,000
2 Pain and suffering 10,000
3 Loss of income 10,000
4 Transportation charges 2,000
5 Extra Nourishment 1,000
6 Medical expenses as per medical 7,497
bills
Total 65,497
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
the material documents on record.
8 The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/
Karnataka State Transport Corporation submitted that the accident
occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry
and in the absence of any valid documents, the Tribunal has fixed the
monthly income of the claimant at Rs.5,000/- and has awarded more
amount as compensation and hence the Award passed by the Tribunal is
liable to be set aside.
9. Before the Tribunal, it was the contention of the
claimant that, he was aged 27 years on the date of accident and he was a
driver by profession and was earning more than Rs.5000/- per month
and that in view of the accident, he sustained grievous injuries on his
thigh and left wrist and his vision is also affected. It was further
contended by the claimant that he sustained fracture in his left hand
and decital Radius and surgery was made, as a result of which, he could
not drive lorry by using his left hand forcedly. Further, due to operation
in the right thigh, his right hip-joint got tightened and hence, he is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
unable to squat and stand. The claimant has also stated that he
underwent treatment as inpatient for about two months and spent huge
amount towards medical expenses. The claimant has produced Ex.P2-
Wound Certificate and Ex.P3-Disability Certificate, in which the
permanent disability of the claimant was assessed at 30 to 35%.
10. Considering all the above facts and the nature of
injuries and fractures sustained by the claimant and after analysing the
medical records, the Tribunal has awarded a just and reasonable
compensation of Rs.65,497/-, which is very nominal and hence, this
Court does not find any reason to interfere with the same.
12. In the result,
(i) the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
The award passed by the Tribunal is upheld. The connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
(ii) The appellant is directed to deposit the amount as
awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 7.5.% p.a. from the
date of claim petition till the date of deposit, less the amount if any,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
already deposited, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) On such deposit being made by the appellant, the
Respondent/Claimant is at liberty to withdraw the same, after following
due process of law.
18.08.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
mst
To
The Additional District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dharmapuri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.3224 of 2008
S.VAIDYANAHAN, J.
mst
CMA. No.3224 of 2008
18.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
