Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Suresh on 3 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A. No.229 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Bharathipuram,
Dharmapuri. .. Appellant
Vs.
Suresh .. Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2013, made
in M.C.O.P. No.148 of 2013, on the file of the Special Sub Court, (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal), Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : Mr. D.Venkatachalam
___
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-
Transport Corporation against the quantum of compensation granted by the
Tribunal in the award dated 28.10.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.148 of 2013,
on the file of the Special Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Krishnagiri.
2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P. No.148 of 2013, on the
file of the Special Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Krishnagiri.
The respondent/claimant filed the said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the
accident that took place on 04.12.2008.
3.According to the respondent, on the date of accident, when the
respondent was traveling in the Bus bearing Registration No.TN-29-N-1455
belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation from Kattinayanapalli
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
Murugar Koil towards old pet road bridge, the driver of the Bus drove the
same in a rash and negligent manner at uncontrollable speed in the damaged
road and due to heavy jolting near the bridge, the accident occurred. The
accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the Bus.
In the accident, the respondent sustained grievous injuries and hence, filed
claim petition claiming compensation against the appellant as owner of the
Bus involved in the accident.
4.The appellant-Transport Corporation, filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondent in the claim petition.
According to the appellant, on the date of accident, the respondent was
traveling on the rear foot board of the said Bus inspite of Conductor's several
cautions to come inside the Bus. When the Bus was nearing bridge, the
respondent himself touched the mud road with left leg and sustained simple
injuries. The accident occurred only due to negligent act of the respondent
and there is no fault on the part of the driver of the Bus. Hence, the appellant
is not liable to pay compensation to the respondent. The respondent has to
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
prove the injuries sustained by him in the accident and the medical expenses
incurred for the same. In any event, the total compensation claimed by the
respondent is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the respondent examined himself as P.W.1,
Dr.Devendrian was examined as P.W.2 and 5 documents were marked as
Exs.P1 to P5. The appellant examined the driver of the Bus involved in the
accident as R.W.1, but did not mark any documents.
6.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent
driving by driver of the Bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation
and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.2,12,400/- as compensation to
the respondent.
7.Questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in
the award dated 28.10.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.148 of 2013, the appellant
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
– Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the respondent failed to prove his age, avocation
and income by oral and documentary evidence. The Tribunal ought not to
have taken the percentage of disability assessed by P.W.2 Doctor, as the same
is on higher side. The Tribunal instead of awarding a sum of Rs.2,000/- per
percentage for disability, excessively awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/- per
percentage. In the absence of any evidence to prove that the respondent
requires future medical treatment, the Tribunal erred in awarding a sum of
Rs.10,000/- towards future medical expenses. The amounts awarded by the
Tribunal towards loss of expectations of life, loss of social enjoyment of life
and other conventional heads are excessive and prayed for reducing the
compensation granted by the Tribunal.
9.Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the materials available on record.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
10.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of
the respondent that in the accident, he suffered severe injuries and multiple
fractures all over the body. P.W.2 Doctor examined the appellant and certified
that the appellant suffered 30% disability. The Tribunal considering the
evidence of P.W.2 Doctor and the disability certificate marked as Ex.P5,
accepted the percentage of disability assessed by P.W.2 Doctor. The same is
in order. The Tribunal following the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court reported in 2012 (1) TN MAC 611 (DB), wherein for 95% disability,
the Hon'ble Division Bench has awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage
of disability, as an exceptional case, held that the respondent being a student
at the time of accident, would have suffered lot due to the injuries sustained
in the accident and awarded a sum of Rs.90,000/- towards disability at the
rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for 30% disability. The said reason given by
the Tribunal is in order and hence, the same is not interfered with.
Considering the nature of injuries suffered and the disability sustained by the
appellant, the Tribunal awarded compensation towards future medical
expenses and loss of expectation of life and for loss of social enjoyment of
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
life and the same is not excessive. There is no error in the award of the
Tribunal, warranting interference by this Court.
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the
amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,12,400/- together with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit is
confirmed. The appellant-Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount 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.148 of 2013. On such deposit,
the 1st respondent is permitted to withdraw the award amount with interest
and costs, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn, by filing
necessary applications before the Tribunal. No costs.
03.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
gsa
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.229 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
To
1.The Special Subordinate Judge,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
C.M.A. No.229 of 2021
03.02.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
