Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Stalin on 24 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A. No.485 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Bharathipuram,
Dharmapuri 636 701. .. Appellant
Vs.
Stalin .. Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2014, made
in M.C.O.P. No.567 of 2013, on the file of the Special Sub Court, (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal), Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : Mr. D.Venkatachalam
___
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
JUDGMENT
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 10.01.2014, made in M.C.O.P. No.567 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.567 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.5,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the
accident that took place on 25.09.2004.
3.According to the respondent, on the date of accident, when he was
walking with his father from Thogarapalli Maligai Shop, near Thogarapalli
colony mini water tank, the driver of a Bus bearing Registration No.TN-29-
N-0902 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation drove the same in a
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
rash and negligent manner, at uncontrollable speed, without sounding horn,
without minding the rules of the road from Bargur to Pochampalli side and
dashed against the backside of the respondent and caused the accident. Due to
the said impact, the respondent fell down and sustained injuries. The accident
occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the Bus. 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 said Bus bearing
Registration No.TN-29-N-0902 was driven by its driver from Bargur towards
Pochampalli slowly, cautiously, observing all the rules of the road, sounding
horn and keeping to the extreme left side of the road. At that time, the
respondent who was playing cricket, ran across the road to pick the cricket
ball, fell down by hitting a stone and sustained injuries. The respondent did
not sustain injuries due to involvement of the Bus belonging to the appellant
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
and there is no fault on the part of the driver of the said Bus. Hence, the
appellant is not liable to pay compensation to the respondent. In any event,
the respondent has to prove his age, avocation and income, injuries sustained
and treatment taken, to claim compensation. The total compensation claimed
by the Tribunal is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the respondent examined himself as P.W.1,
examined Dr.Devendran as P.W.2 and marked 4 documents as Exs.P1 to P4.
The appellant did not let in any oral and documentary evidence.
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.4,75,000/- as compensation to
the respondent.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
7.Questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in
the award dated 10.01.2014, made in M.C.O.P. No.567 of 2013, the appellant
– Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the Tribunal ought not to have accepted the
evidence of P.W.2 Doctor who assessed the disability of the respondent only
for a particular limb as 45%, instead of calculating for the whole body. The
lumpsum amount of Rs.4,00,000/- granted by the Tribunal under the head of
non-pecuniary damages is on higher side. In the absence of any proof, the
Tribunal erred in awarding an excessive sum of Rs.25,000/- towards future
medical expenses. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
other heads are excessive and prayed for reducing the compensation granted
by the Tribunal.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
9.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the materials available on record.
10.It is the contention of the respondent in the claim petition that in the
accident, the respondent who was aged 9 years, suffered grievous injuries
viz., swelling over left parietal region, pain in left collar bone and abrasion in
the right knee. Due to the injuries sustained, he could not lift his left hand
above 70 degree without pain and suffered fracture of left parietal bone in the
head, due to which there is giddiness and tiredness. Therefore, the respondent
was unable to do his day-to-day work as he was doing earlier. P.W.2-Doctor
assessed the respondent and certified that the respondent suffered 45%
disability. The Tribunal considering Exs.P2, P3 and P4 – wound certificate,
X-ray and disability certificate respectively, in the absence of any contra
evidence by the appellant to disprove the evidence of P.W.2-Doctor and
disability certificate issued by him, fixed the percentage of disability suffered
by the appellant as 45%. Following the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reported in 2013 (2) TN MAC 338 (SC), [Master Mallikarjun Vs. Divisional
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., & another], the Tribunal awarded a
sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards disability and the same is in order. In addition
to awarding compensation towards disability, the Tribunal considering the
nature of injuries, disability, age of the respondent, awarded a sum of
Rs.25,000/- each towards discomfort and loss of earnings to the parents
during the period of treatment, medical and incidental expenses and future
medical expenses for correction of fracture occipital bone and incidental
expenses for such treatment. The same are 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.4,75,000/- 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.567 of 2013. On such deposit,
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
the 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.
24.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
gsa
To
1.The Special Subordinate Judge,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.485 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
C.M.A. No.485 of 2021
24.02.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
