Tamil Nadu State Transport vs Valli
2021 Latest Caselaw 2210 Mad

                                                                          C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 02.02.2021

                                                     CORAM:

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                            C.M.A.No.724 of 2020
                                                     and
                                            C.M.P.No.4425 of 2020
                   Tamil Nadu State Transport
                    Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited
                   Represented by Managing Director
                   No.37, Mettupalayam Road
                   Coimbatore-641 043.                                          ... Appellant


                                                          Vs.
                   1.Valli
                   2.Gowripriya
                   3.Neelakrishnan
                   4.Raman
                   5.Karuppal

                   6.Sembannan                                                 .. Respondents


                   Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor

                   Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2019 made

                   in M.C.O.P.No.1478 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, I

                   Additional District Court, Tiruppur.


                   1/9


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                    C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

                                             For Appellant     : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar

                                                        JUDGMENT

This matter is heard through “Video-Conferencing”.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the

appellant/Transport Corporation to set aside the award dated 22.03.2019

made in M.C.O.P.No.1478 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, I Additional District Court, Tiruppur.

2.The appellant/Transport Corporation is 2nd respondent in

M.C.O.P.No.1478 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, I

Additional District Court, Tiruppur. The respondents 1 to 5 filed the said

claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the death

of one Murugesan @ Murugan, who died in the accident that took place on

18.06.2014.

3.According to the respondents 1 to 5 on the date of accident, i.e., on

18.06.2014 at about 8.45 p.m., while the deceased Murugesan @ Murugan

was travelling as a pillion rider in a Bajaj CT100 motorcycle, which was

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

driven by one Prakash Kumar, on the left side of the road on Pollachi to

Palladam Road, near Brindavan Mill, Sultanpet, from South to North

direction, the 1st respondent, the driver of the bus, who was overtaking a car,

dashed against the motorcycle in which the deceased travelled as pillion rider

and caused the accident. In the accident, the said Murugesan @ Murugan

sustained multiple and severe injuries all over the body and died on the spot.

Therefore, the respondents 1 to 5 filed the above claim petition claiming

compensation as against the 5th respondent, the driver of the bus and the

appellant/Transport Corporation.

4.The 6th respondent, the driver of the bus, remained exparte before the

Tribunal.

5.The appellant/Transport Corporation filed counter statement denying

the averments made in the claim petition and stated that while the driver of

the bus was driving the same in a careful manner from Tiruppur to Pollachi,

near Brindavan mill, the rider of the motorcycle in which the deceased

travelled as pillion rider, who was coming in the opposite direction, rode the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

same in a rash and negligent manner and tried to overtake the car, which was

going ahead of the motorcycle without noticing the bus coming in the opposite

direction, hit on the right side body of the car and fell down on the road along

with the pillion rider. On seeing this, the driver of the bus swerved to left side

to avoid accident and inspite of the best efforts taken by him, the driver of the

bus dashed on the deceased, who already fell down on the road. The driver of

the bus was not responsible for the accident. The accident has occurred solely

due to rash and negligent riding by the rider of the motorcycle in which the

deceased travelled as pillion rider. Mere filing of F.I.R. against the driver of

the bus is not substantial piece of evidence to come to the conclusion that the

accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of the bus. The owner and

insurer of the motorcycle were not made as parties to the claim petition.

Therefore, the claim petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties.

Hence, the appellant/Transport Corporation is not liable to pay any

compensation to the respondents 1 to 5. The appellant has also denied the

age, avocation and income of the deceased. In any event, the compensation

claimed by the respondents 1 to 5 is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the

claim petition.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

6.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent, wife of the deceased,

examined herself as P.W.1, one Prakash Kumar, eye-witness to the accident

was examined as P.W.2 and five documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P5.

The appellant/Transport Corporation examined the driver of the bus, the 1 st

respondent herein as R.W.1 and did not file any documentary evidence.

7.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by

the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and

directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.16,37,416/- as compensation to the

respondents 1 to 5.

8.The appellant/Transport Corporation has come out with the present

appeal to set aside the award dated 22.03.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.1478 of

2014.

9.Though the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation raised grounds with regard to negligence, at the time of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

arguments, he restricted his arguments only with regard to quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

10.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation contended that the respondents 1 to 5 have stated that at the time

of accident, the deceased was working as a loading and unloading man and

was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month. The respondents 1 to 5 have not

produced any document to prove the age, avocation and income of the

deceased. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to income of the

deceased, the Tribunal erred in fixing a sum of Rs.9,000/- per month as

notional income of the deceased, which is on the higher side. The

compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium to the 1st

respondent is also excessive and prayed for setting aside the award of the

Tribunal.

11.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation and perused the entire materials on record.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

12.It is the case of the respondents 1 to 5 that the deceased was

working as a loading and unloading man and was earning a sum of

Rs.12,000/- per month. The respondents 1 to 5 have failed to substantiate the

said contention. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to age,

avocation and income, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.9,000/- per month as

notional income of the deceased, age of the deceased as 45 years as per

Ex.P2/Post-mortem Certificate, granted 25% enhancement towards future

prospects, applied multiplier '14' and deducted 1/4th towards personal

expenses and the same are proper. There are five dependants of the deceased.

The respondents 1 to 5 are wife, daughter, son, father and mother of the

deceased Murugesan @ Murugan respectively. The Tribunal awarded a sum

of Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss of consortium to the 1 st respondent, which is

excessive. But the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss

of love and affection to the respondents 2 to 5 and loss of estate. In view of

the same, the said sum of Rs.2,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss

of consortium to the 1st respondent is not interfered with. The amounts

awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses and transportation are just

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

and reasonable and hence, the same are hereby confirmed. In view of the

above, there is no reason to interfere with the award of the Tribunal.

13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

sum of Rs.16,37,416/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the

respondents 1 to 5 along with interest and costs is confirmed. The

appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award

amount along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if

any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. On such deposit, the respondents 1 to 5 are permitted to withdraw

their respective share of the award amount, on the basis of apportionment

fixed by the Tribunal, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the

amount if any, already withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous

Petition is closed. No costs.

02.02.2021 Index : Yes / No kj

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.724 of 2020

V.M.VELUMANI,J.

Kj

To

1.I Additional District Judge Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Tiruppur.

2.The Section Officer VR Section High Court Chennai.

C.M.A.No.724 of 2020 and C.M.P.No.4425 of 2020

02.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/