Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Kanaga on 23 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Salem Division – II,
Dharmapuri. .. Appellant
Vs.
1.Kanaga
2.Minor. Anusha
3.Minor. Aminesh
4.Minor. Abisanth
(Minor respondents 2 to 4 are represented by
their mother, Kanaga, 1st respondent herein)
5.Chinnakannu .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
11.06.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2011 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Harur.
For Appellant : Mr.D.Venkatachalam
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the award
dated 11.06.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2011 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Harur.
2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2011 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Harur. The
respondents filed the above said claim petition claiming a sum of
Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Ambedkar, who died in
the accident that took place on 19.10.2011.
3.According to respondents, on 19.10.2011 at about 19.45 hours, while
the deceased Ambedkar was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration
No.TN 20 BX 7267 on the Kailapuram – Hanumantheertham Road near
Mathiampatti Pirivu Road, the driver of the bus bearing Registration No.TN
29 N 1515 belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation, drove the bus in a
rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction without following any
road traffic rules and regulations in a high speed, dashed against the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
motorcycle rode by the deceased and caused the accident. In the accident, the
said Ambedkar sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. Therefore, the
respondents filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as
compensation against the appellant-Transport Corporation.
4.The appellant-Transport Corporation filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondents. The appellant denied the
manner of accident as alleged by the respondents. According to the appellant,
at the time of accident, while the driver of the bus was driving the bus slowly
and cautiously in a careful manner by observing all the traffic rules in the “S”
bend near Mathiyampatti diversion road, the deceased only rode his
motorcycle from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner without
observing the traffic rules at an uncontrollable speed and dashed against the
front side of the oncoming bus and invited the accident. Therefore, the
accident has occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the deceased
and not due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the bus belonging to
appellant. Hence, the respondents are not entitled to any compensation as
claimed by them. The F.I.R. was registered against the driver of the bus by
influence of the local public. The respondents have to implead the owner and
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
insurer of the motorcycle rode by the deceased as necessary parties in the
claim petition. The appellant-Transport Corporation denied the age, avocation
and income of the deceased. In any event, the quantum of compensation
claimed by the respondents is highly excessive and prayed for dismissal of the
claim petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined herself as P.W.1
and one K.Gandhi, eyewitness to the accident was examined as P.W.2 and 6
documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P6. On behalf of the appellant, one
K.Muthu, Driver of the bus belonging to appellant was examined as R.W.1
and no document was marked.
6.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.6,96,500/- as compensation to
the respondents.
7.Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
in the award dated 11.06.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2011, the
appellant-Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the
respondents failed to prove the age, avocation and income of the deceased by
producing valid documents. In the absence of any material evidence to prove
the avocation and income, a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month fixed by the
Tribunal as notional income of the deceased is excessive. In any event, the
total compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.6,96,500/- is highly
excessive and prayed for setting aside the award passed by the Tribunal.
9.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the entire materials on record.
10.From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the claim
of the respondents that the deceased was was a Building Maestiri, aged 29
years, earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month at the time of accident. But
they failed to prove the said contention. In the absence of any material
evidence with regard to avocation and income, the Tribunal considering the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
nature of work done by the deceased, fixed a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month as
notional income of the deceased. The accident occurred in the year 2011 and
the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is not excessive. The deceased was
aged 29 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal has failed to award any
enhancement towards future prospects. There are five dependants of the
deceased. The Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses
of the deceased, applied multiplier '17' and awarded compensation towards
loss of dependency. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss
of love and affection to the minor respondents 2 to 4, who are the children of
the deceased. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under conventional
heads are also meagre. In view of the same, the award of the Tribunal does
not warrant any interference by this Court.
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and a sum
of Rs.6,96,500/- 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 amount if any already deposited, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
of M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Sub Court, Harur. On such deposit, the respondents 1 & 5 are
permitted to withdraw their respective share of the award amount as per the
ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal along with proportionate interest
and costs after adjusting the amount, if any already withdrawn, by filing
necessary applications before the Tribunal. The share of the minor
respondents 2 to 4 are directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalized
Banks, till the minor respondents 2 to 4 attain majority. On such deposit, the
1st respondent, being the Mother of the minor respondents 2 to 4 is permitted
to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months for the welfare of the
minor respondents 2 to 4. No costs.
23.02.2021
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Harur.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.454 of 2021
23.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
