Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs M. Vinothkumar on 31 August, 2021
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 31.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.12372 of 2021
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited
Rep. by Managing Director, ... Appellant
Villupuram.
Vs.
1. M. Vinothkumar
2. Divya
3. Suganya
(3rd respondent declared as Major and
Amended as per I.A.No.5/2020
dated 19.11.2020) ... Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 18.01.2021
made in M.C.O.P.No.70 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, II Additional District Judge, Vellore @ Ranipet.
For Appellant : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
For Respondents : Mr.C.Premkumar
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
2. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the award
dated 18.01.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.70 of 2011 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District Judge, Vellore @ Ranipet.
3. The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P.No.70 of 2011 on the file
of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District Judge, Vellore
@ Ranipet. The respondents herein filed the said claim petition claiming a sum
of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Manoharan, who died
in the accident that took place on 27.05.2008.
4. According to claimants/respondents, on 27.05.2008 at about 04:15
hours, the deceased Manoharan was travelling as a passenger in TNSTC Bus
bearing Reg.No.TN 32 N 2232 belonging to the appellant-Transport
Corporation from Tiruvannamalai to Vellore and when the Bus came near
Petrol Bunk at Santhavasal village in C.C.road, the driver of above said Bus
drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit against Tamarind tree
standing on the road side and due to the said impact, the bus got damaged and
the deceased Manoharan died on the spot due to the crushing of his head. A
criminal case was registered agianst the driver of TNSTC Bus belonging to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
appellant by Santhavasal Police Station in Cr.No.235/2008 under Section 279,
337, 338 & 304(A) of IPC. The accident had occurred only due to the rash and
negligent act of the driver of TNSTC Bus. Therefore, the respondents filed the
said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation against
the appellant-Transport Corporation.
5. The appellant-Transport Corporation filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondents and stated that the accident
had not occurred as alleged by the respondents. On 27.05.2008 the driver of
the Transport Corporation Bus bearing Reg.No.TN 32 N 2232 has started the
bus from Tiruvannamalai to Vellore and when he came near Petrol Bunk at
Santhavasal Village in C.C.Road, in a careful manner, at that time, one Lorry
came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and after seeing
the lorry, the driver of the bus has suddenly applied the break and lost the
balance and hit against the right side of the tree. The accident had occurred
only due to the rash and negligent act of the Lorry driver. Therefore, there was
no negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation
and the accident had occurred only due to negligence on the part of the Lorry
driver. Therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay any compensation to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
respondents. In any event, the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is highly excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
6. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1,
one Saravanan, eyewitness to the accident was examined as P.W.2 and 7
documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P7. The appellant-Transport Corporation
did not let in any oral and documentary evidence.
7. The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving
by the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation and
directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation to the
respondents.
8. Against the said award dated 18.01.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.70 of
2011, the appellant-Transport Corporation has come up with the present
appeal.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the respondents failed to prove the age, avocation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
and income of the deceased. In the absence of any material evidence to prove
the avocation and income of the deceased, a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month
fixed by the Tribunal as notional income of the deceased is excessive. He
further submitted that the Tribunal fixed negligence on the part of the driver of
the bus-Transport Corporation based on Ex.P1–FIR and awarded excessive
compensation. In any event, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under
different heads as compensation to the respondents are excessive and prayed
for setting aside the award passed by the Tribunal.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents made his
submissions in support of the award passed by the Tribunal and prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
11. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and
perused the entire materials on record.
12. From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the
contention of the respondents that the accident had occurred only due to rash
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
and negligent driving by the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport
Corporation. To prove the said contention, the 1st respondent examined himself
as P.W.1, one Saravanan, an eyewitness to the accident was examined as
P.W.2, marked F.I.R. as Ex.P1, which was registered against the driver of the
appellant bus and also marked Ex.P3/M.V.I. Report. In Ex.P3/M.V.I. Report,
it has been mentioned that accident has not occurred due to mechanical defect
of the bus. On the other hand, it is the contention of the appellant that the
accident has occurred only due to negligence on the part of the driver of the
lorry, who came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and
invited the accident. To prove the said contention, the appellant has not
examined the driver of the bus or any eyewitness and has also not filed any
document to support their contention that accident has occurred only due to
negligence on the part of the lorry driver. The Tribunal considering the
evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, Exs.P1 & P3 and in the absence of any contra
evidence on the part of the appellant, held that accident has occurred only due
to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-
Transport Corporation. There is no error in the said finding of the Tribunal
warranting interference by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
13. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal
considering all the materials in proper perspective, awarded a sum of
Rs.19,00,000/- as compensation to the respondents which is not excessive and
the same is hereby confirmed.
14. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the
sum of Rs.19,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the
respondents, along with interest and costs is confirmed. The appellant-
Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the award amount along with
interest and costs, less the amout if any already deposited, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit
of M.C.O.P.No.70 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
II Additional District Judge, Vellore @ Ranipet. On such deposit, the
respondents 1 to 3 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares of the
award amount as per the ratio of apportionment made by the Tribunal, along
with proportionate interest and costs, after adjusting the amount, if any already
withdrawn, by filing necessary applications before the Tribunal. Consequently,
the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
31.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
dpq
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
The II Additional District Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Vellore @ Ranipet.
S. VAIDYANATHAN, J.
dpq
C.M.A.No.2244 of 2021
31.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
