Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs M.Vallimail on 5 February, 2021
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 05.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.A.(MD)No.20 of 2020
and
C.M.P(MD).No.398 of 2020
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Through its
The Managing Director
Madurai ...Appellant/2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.M.Vallimail
2.Minor M.Saravanan
3.Minor.Prithviraj
4.Chellaiah
5.Deivammal
(Minor respondents 2 & 3 represented by their mother
and natural guardian of 1st respondent ) ....Respondents/Petitioners
6.K.Saravanan ...Respondent/1st Respondent
PRAYER: This Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 19.06.2018 in
M.C.O.P.No.139 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Special District Court), Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
For appellant :Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi
For R1 to R5 : Mr.K.K.Samy
For R6 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the
Judgment and Decree dated 19.06.2018 in M.C.O.P.No.139 of 2016 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special District Court), Madurai.
2.The case of the respondents is that on 17.12.2014 at about 7.00 p.m
the deceased Muthukrishnan was riding a motor cycle bearing registration
No.TN-64-C-4981 from north to south at Avaniyapuram road, at that time,
the bus bearing Registration No.TN-58-N-0074 was driven by its driver,
came from the opposite direction with rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the motor cycle, in the result of the said accident, Muthukrishnan was
died on the spot. Therefore, the respondents herein have filed the claim
petition in M.C.O.P.No.139 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Special District Court), Madurai against the appellant Transport
Corporation claiming a sum of Rs.22,51,400/- as compensation for the death
of Muthukrishnan who is the husband of the first respondent and father of
the respondents 2 and 3 and son of the respondents 4 and 5 where the
http://www.judis.nic.in
Appellant/Transport Corporation filed a detailed counter and denied the
manner of accident.
3.The learned Tribunal by going through the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and on perusal of evidence, has fixed 75% of
contributory negligence on the part of the transport corporation and directed
the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.10,39,620/- with 7.5% interest till
realization as compensation in favour of the respondents herein and fixed
25% of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased who drove the
two wheeler without having valid license and without wearing helmet. As
against the said judgment and decree of the Tribunal, the appellant
Corporation preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal questioning
the negligence as well as the quantum of compensation.
4.When this appeal came up for admission, interim stay was granted by
this Court on condition that the appellant shall deposit the entire award
amount along with interest to the credit of Motor Accident Claims
Trubunal/Special District Judge, Madurai, in M.C.O.P.No.139 of 2016,
within a period of four weeks, failing which, interim stay granted shall stand
automatically vacated without any further reference to this Court. On such
deposit being made, the claimants are permitted to withdraw 50% of the
http://www.judis.nic.in
award amount with proportionate interest as per apportionment made by the
Tribunal. In spite of the order passed by this Court on 20.01.2020, the
appellant Corporation had not deposited the amount awarded by the Tribunal
and therefore, the interim order granted got automatically vacated.
5.The learned counsel for the appellant questioned the negligence. The
driver of the Bus who is the eye witness was not enquired. Only the
conductor who is not the eye-witness alone was enquired and therefore, the
learned Judge fixed the negligence on the part of the appellant Transport
Corporation, where, I do not find any infirmity.
6.Even in quantum, the award passed by the Tribunal is very
reasonable and in fact, the negligence fixed on the deceased for not wearing
the helmet, in my opinion, is very high and the claimants have not filed any
appeal.
7.The deceased is the only bread-winner of his family. He has left his
two minor children, aged parents and his wife. Two minor children needs
earnings to meet out the educational expenses and the aged parents need
frequent medical treatment to overcome their terminal and other diseases.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed
http://www.judis.nic.in
by the Tribunal is very reasonable , therefore, I am not inclined to interfere
with the same.
8.With the above observation, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
05.02.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
msa
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is
the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Special District Court, Madurai.
2.The Record Keeper,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
J.NISHA BANU,J.
msa
C.M.A.(MD)No.20 of 2020
and
C.M.P(MD).No.398 of 2020
05.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
