Madras High Court
Abusama vs Maimoon Beevi on 19 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
CMA No.1526 of 2010
1. Abusama
2. Parveen Banu
3. Minor Babu ... Appellants
..vs..
1.Maimoon Beevi
2.S.Ayyappan
3.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore Division) Ltd.,
Erode, represented by its Managing Director,
Chennimalai Road, Erode. ... Respondents
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.2009 made in
M.C.O.P.No.211 of 2008, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Additional District Judge cum Fast Tract Court No.I, Erode.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
For Appellant : Mr. R.Rajashamaayathri
For Mr.K.Govi Ganesan
For Respondent : Mr.K.J. Sivakumar – R3
Notice unserved – R1
Notice Served - R2
----
JUDGMENT
Dissatisfied with the judgment and decree, dated
16.12.2009, passed by the tribunal, the appellants/claimants 1to 3 are
before this Court to set aside the apportionment of compensation granted
to the 4th claimant.
2. The case of the claimants before the tribunal is that on
01.10.2007 at about 8.00pm the deceased Mohammed Rasool was
driving the motor cycle bearing Reg.No. TN33 AY 8824 by observing
all the traffic rules. At the time, near Maharani College, the 2nd
respondent herein/driver of the transport corporation bus bearing
Reg.No. TN33 N 1845 drove the bus at a high speed in a rash and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
negligent manner and dashed against the said Mohammed Rasool, dDue
to which, he sustained severe injuries and died on way to hospital.
Hence, the claimants 1 to 4, who are the wife, son, daughter and sister of
the deceased filed a claim petition, claiming compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/- for the death of the deceased Mohammed Rasool.
3. The tribunal after analyzing both oral and documentary
evidences, has fixed the negligence on the driver of the transport
corporation bus and directed the transport corporation to pay the
compensation of Rs.3,90,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a
from the date of petition till realization.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants 1to
3 has submitted that the tribunal failed to consider the evidence of PW1,
who deposed that 4th claimant was spinster at the time of filing claim
petition and subsequently she got married and she is living with her
husband at her matrimonial home. The learned counsel has further
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
submitted that the 1st respondent herein after marriage cannot be
considered as a dependant of the deceased and she is not entitled for
compensation. Hence prayed to set aside the compensation awarded to
the 4th claimant/1st respondent.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned
counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent/Transport Corporation and
perused the documents available on record.
6. Neither the appellants nor transport corporation had challenged
the liability or quantum in the appeal. The only ground raised in the
appeal is against the compensation awarded by the tribunal to the sister
of the deceased/1st respondent herein.
7. It is clear from the claim petition and the award passed by the
tribunal that the 4th claimant/1st respondent herein who is the sister of the
deceased was unmarried at the time of the accident and she was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
depending on the income of the deceased. Further, no proof was placed
before the tribunal that she was subsequently got married, pending claim
petition. Therefore, this Court finds no force on the contention raised by
the learned counsel for the appellants.
8. In view of the above, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
dismissed as devoid of merits. This Court holds that the 1st respondent
herein/sister of the deceased is entitled for compensation and
accordingly, the apportionment of compensation awarded by the tribunal
to the 1st respondent/4th claimant is confirmed. No costs.
19.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
ak
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1526 of 2010
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.,
ak
To
1. The Additional District Judge cum Fast Tract Court No.I,
(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal),
Erode.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
CMA.No.1526 of 2010
19.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
