The Managing Director vs G. Kailash
2021 Latest Caselaw 17258 Mad

                                                                                   C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                            DATED : 24.08.2021

                                                  CORAM

                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

                                        C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021 and
                                         C.M.P.No. 14398 of 2021


            The Managing Director,
            Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
            Villupuram Region, Villupuram.
            (Amended as per I.A.No. 613/2015 dated 24.02.2016)               ...        Appellant

                                                    Vs.

            G. Kailash                                                       ...        Respondent




            Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

            1988 against the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No. 174 of

            2012 on the file of the Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Sub Judge,

            Kanchipuram.

                                    For Appellant: Mr.K.J. Sivakumar

                                                 *********




            1/7

http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                         C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021



                                                      JUDGMENT

This Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation challenging the Award

dated 29.04.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Sub Judge,

Kanchipuram in M.C.O.P.No. 174 of 2012, directing the Appellant/Transport

Corporation to pay the Claimant a sum of Rs.13,80,000 /- as compensation for the

injuries sustained in an accident which occurred on 29.01.2021 involving the bus

owned by the appellant/Transport Corporation.

2. Before the Tribunal, the Respondent/Claimant claimed a sum of Rs.30,00,000/-

as compensation for the injuries sustained by him. On the side of the

Respondent/Claimant, PW1 & PW2 were examined and Exs.P1 to P18 were marked

before the Tribunal. On the side of the Appellant/Transport Corporation, RW1 was

examined and No Exhibits were marked.

3. On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the

Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.13,80,000/- as compensation to the

Respondent/Claimant. Details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the

impugned Award, are as follows :

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

Amount awarded by Heads the Tribunal (Rs.) Loss of income 9,18,000 Travel expenses 10,000.0 Medical and Nourishment 4,00,000 charges Pain and sufferings 50,000.0 Loss of clothing charges 2,000.00 Total Rs.13,80,000/-

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material documents

available on record.

5. The learned counsel for the Appellant contended that in the F.I.R., it is alleged

that the unknown vehicle hit against the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation,

but in contrary the P.W.1 – the claimant has deposed that the bus belonging to the

Transport Corporation hit against the unknown vehicle, resulting in accident. Further,

the Claims Tribunal ought not to have fixed the disability as 85% without any proof.

The Claims tribunal ought not to have awarded compensation towards the extra

nourishment which is on the higher side.

6. Insofar the first contention raised by the Respondent/Claimant is concerned,

this Court in the case of Maya Azhagar and another Vs. Thangiah and another

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

reported in 2011 (2) TN MAC 391 has held that the FIR is a substantive piece of

evidence and it cannot be placed on pedestal higher than the statement on oath. The

first information report could be used in Criminal case for corroboration or for

contradiction, the same would not support the case of the Transport Corporation.

7. In the light of the said Judgment, this Court is not able to accept the contention

of the Transport Corporation and the Claims Tribunal has rightly taken note of the said

Judgment and fixed negligence on the part of the driver of the Transport Corporation.

8. Insofar as the fixation of 85% disability is concerned, the Claims Tribunal

considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and Ex.P3-Hospital

Registration card, Exs. P16, P17, P18- test reports and Ex.P14- disability certificate has

rightly fixed the disability at 85% which is not on the higher side. The Claims Tribunal

on considering the nature of injury, period of treatment and age of the injured has

rightly adopted the multiplier method and calculated Loss of earnings at Rs. 51,800/-

which is not on higher side.

9.Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the Respondent/Claimant and by

considering the oral and documentary evidence, the quantum of compensation awarded

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

by the Tribunal to the Respondent/Claimant under various heads, totalling a sum of

Rs.13,80,000/- cannot be considered to be excessive, as alleged by the Appellant/

Transport Corporation. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in

this Appeal. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

10. The Appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire amount

awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the

Claim Petition till the date of realization, less the amount, if any, already deposited to

the credit of M.C.O.P.No. 174 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Additional Sub Judge, Kanchipuram within a period of eight weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is

directed to transfer the Award amount directly to the Bank account of the

Respondent/Claimant through RTGS, within a period of two weeks.

24.08.2021 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No (arr)/(shk)

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

To:

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, The Additional Sub Judge, Kanchipuram

2. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2499 of 2021

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

(arr)/(shk)

C.M.A. No. 2499 of 2021

24.08.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in