Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Senthil on 27 August, 2021
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
C.M.A.No. 2513 of 2021 and
C.M.P.No.14435 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Villupuram Division No.1,
Villupuram,
3/137, Salamedeu,
Vazhuthareddy and post,
Villupuram Taluk. ...Appellant
vs.
1. Senthil
2. S.Arul Prakash
3. The Shriram General Insurance Company Limited,
Divisional Office at No.66,
Thirumalai Pillai Road,
T-Nagar, Chennai. . ..Respondents
Page No.1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 25.02.2019
made in M.C.O.P.No. 827 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, The Special Sub Court (MCOP), Tiruvannamalai.
For Appellant: Mr.K.J. Sivakumar
*****
JUDGMENT
This Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation challenging
the Award dated 25.02.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, the Special Sub Court (MCOP), Tiruvannamalai in M.C.O.P.No.
827 of 2017, directing the Appellant/Transport Corporation to pay the first
Respondent a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries
sustained in an accident which occurred on 09.12.2012 involving the bus
owned by the Appellant/Transport Corporation.
2. Before the Tribunal, the First Respondent/Claimant claimed a sum
of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him. On the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
side of the First Respondent/Claimant, P.W.1 was examined as witness and
Exs.P1 to P6 were marked before the Tribunal. On the side of the
Appellant/Transport Corporation, no witness was examined and no exhibit
was marked. Ex.C1 was marked as Court Exhibit.
3.On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence available on
record, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to
the first Respondent. Details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
under the impugned Award, are as follows :
Amount awarded by
Heads
the Tribunal (Rs.)
Permanent Disability 1,00,000/-
(20 %x 5000)
Total Rs.1,00,000/-
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
documents available on record.
5. The Appellant has challenged the impugned award on the ground
that the learned Judge has failed to consider the Ex.P1 – F.I.R. Further,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
since the claim petition filed under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act,
the award has to be passed following the structured formula given in the
second schedule of the Act, which has not been done by the Tribunal. The
learned trial Judge ought not to have taken permanent disability of the first
Respondent as 20% which is on higher side and the same needs to be
reduced.
6. Admittedly the date of the accident is not in dispute. P.W.1- First
Respondent/Claimant was examined and he was not even cross examined
by the counsel for the Appellant/Transport Corporation. No contra evidence
has been produced by the Appellant before the Tribunal to disprove the
contention of the first Respondent that only due to the rash and negligent
driving by the driver of the bus owned by the Appellant/Transport
Corporation, the accident had happened which resulted in injuries sustained
by him. Further, the Claims Tribunal by considering the fact that since the
Claimant filed the application under Section 163 (A) of the Motor Vehicles
Act, he need not plead or prove the negligence. The Claims Tribunal also
taking note of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Sunilkumar and another
reported in CDJ-2017 (SC) 1291, wherein it is held that it is not open to the
Insurer or Transport Company to raise the defence of negligence on the part
of the victim, has held that the petition filed by the claimant is maintainable
under Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act and the claimant is entitled
to compensation.
7. Insofar as the fixation of 20% disability on the first Respondent is
concerned, the same is supported by documentary evidence, which has been
marked as Ex.C1- disability certificate issued by Medical Board before the
Tribunal. Admittedly, the first Respondent has sustained following
injuries; i) fracture at the Right Femur ii) A Laceration measuring
4x1x1C.M. at the mandible and iii) A Laceration measuring 2x2C.M. at the
right knee and he has filed the discharge summary (Ex.P5) issued by
Government General Hospital, Chennai. The disability certificate, which
would clearly reveal that fixing 20% disability on the first Respondent is a
just one.
8. There was an amendment in the II Schedule of Section 163(A) of
the Motor Vehicles Act, which came into force with effect from 01.01.2019.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
Admittedly, in the case on hand, the accident had taken place on
09.12.2012, which is prior to the amendment. The benefit of the said
amendment needs to be given to the Claimant, by applying the ratio laid
down by this Court in C.M.A.No.1831/2016 and 1832/2016 and Cross
Objection Nos. 77/2016 and 78/2016 dated 19.09.2019, even though the
accident in the said case took place prior to the amendment, may not be
correct.
9. As per the aforesaid amendment in II Schedule of 163(A) of Motor
Vehicles Act, the compensation payable to the victims for permanent
disability shall be Rs.5,00,000/- x percentage of disability as per Schedule I
of the Employees Compensation Act 1923 (8 of 1983) that came into effect
after the date of accident. Taking note of the same, the Tribunal has rightly
awarded compensation towards Permanent Disability at Rs. 1,00,000/-
taking note of the disability percentage @ 20% (20 % x 5000), which is
reasonable and does not warrant interference.
10. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the first
Respondent, the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the
first Respondent under various heads, totalling a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
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 and accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
11. 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.827 of
2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, the Special Sub
Court (MCOP), Tiruvannamalai, 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 1st Respondent/Claimant through RTGS, within a period of
two weeks.
27.08.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
(arr)/(shk)
To:
1. The Motor accident Claims Tribunal,
the Special Sub Court (MCOP),
Tiruvannamalai,
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai 600 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2513 of 2021
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.
(arr)/(shk)
C.M.A. No.2513 of 2021
27.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
