Madras High Court
Tamilnadu State Transport ... vs Kanagavelli on 25 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
CMA.No.1225 of 2011
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Salem Division (Mettur Branch)
12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem ... Appellant
..vs..
1.Kanagavelli
W/o.Balan
2.Hemalatha
D/o.Balan
3.Sukumar
S/o.Balan
4.Sundararajan
S/o. Kandasamy
5.V.Thirumalaisamy
S/o.Vellusamy
6.Cholamandalam MS General
Insurance Company Ltd.,
2nd Floor, 60-A, Mosuvana Street,
EVN Road, Erode-9. ...Respondents
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, against the common judgment and decree dated 03.06.2010
in M.C.O.P.No.185 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident
Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Fast Track Court No.I,
Erode.
For Appellant : Mr. D.Raghu
For Respondents : Notice unserved
----
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Physical hearing".
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the
appellant-Transport Corporation against the judgment and dated
03.06.2010 in M.C.O.P.No.185 of 2009 on the file of the Motor
Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Fast
Track Court No.I, Erode.
2.The appellant is the 2nd respondent before the tribunal . The
respondents 1 to 3 have filed the said claim petition, claiming a sum
of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death occurred in the
road accident that took place on 24.11.2008.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
3. It is the case of the respondents 1 to 3/claimants that on
24.11.2008 at about 5.30 pm the deceased Balan drove the TATA
Ace vehicle bearing Reg.No. TN33-AJ-3323, at the time, the
respondent corporation bus bearing Reg.No. TN30-N-0583 driven by
its driver came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed against the said TATA Ace Van. Due to the
sudden impact, the deceased Balan and the cleaner were sustained
grievous injuries and the Balan died on the spot. The legal heirs of
the deceased Balan have filed a claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation. The tribunal upon analysing the
oral and documentary evidence has concluded that the accident had
occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of
the respondent corporation bus and directed the respondent
corporation to pay a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- as compensation to the
claimants.
4. Challenging the liability and quantum, the Transport
Corporation has preferred the present appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
5. The learned counsel for the appellant/Transport
Corporation has submitted that the tribunal without considering the
evidence of RW1, Who deposed the negligence on the part of the
deceased, has wrongly fixed the negligence on the part of the driver
of the appellant/transport corporation bus. The monthly income
fixed by the tribunal at Rs.4000/- is without any basis and the total
compensation of Rs.7,75,000/- awarded by the tribunal under
various heads is excessive and liable to be interfered with.
6. On the other hand , the learned counsel appearing for the
claimants/respondents 1 to 3 submitted that after examination of
evidence and documents, the tribunal has come to the conclusion
that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligence on
the part of the driver of the transport corporation bus and awarded
compensation of Rs. 7,75,000/- under various heads, which is fair
and reasonable and does not require any modification by this Court.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/Transport
Corporation and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
1to 3/claimants and perused the document available on record.
8. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants three
witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to PW3 and marked eight
documents ExA1 to A8. On side of the respondents RW1 was
examined and marked one documents RW1.
9. From a perusal of the award, the driver of the bus was not
examined to substantiate the evidence of RW1. Based on the
evidence of the PW2/cleaner who was also injured in the said
accident and the documents marked by the claimants Ex.A2 to
Ex.A6 has concluded that the accident had occurred due to
negligence on the part of the driver of the transport corporation bus
and directed the appellant/transport corporation to pay the
compensation amount. Thus, this Court confirms the negligence and
liability as against the appellant/ transport corporation
10. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned,
admittedly, at the time of the accident, the deceased was a driver,
under the 3rd respondent. The claimant have also marked the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
driving licence of the deceased Balan as Ex.A8 and there is no
dispute with regard to the avocation of the deceased. The claimants
have claimed a sum of Rs.12,000/- as monthly income of the
deceased. Based on the evidence of PW2/Owner of the TATA Ace
vehicle, the tribunal has fixed monthly income at Rs.6,000/- and
deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses and applied 15 years
multiplier and calculated the loss of dependancy at Rs.7,20,000/-.
As per the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Sarala Verma's case the proper multiplier for the age group
between 40 and 45 is 14 years. Therefore, this Court by applying
the above principles, modifies the compensation awarded under the
head 'Loss of dependancy' at Rs.6,72,000/- .
11. Considering the age and avocation of the deceased, this
Court is of the view that compensation awarded by the tribunal
under the conventional heads requires enhancement. Accordingly,
the compensation under other heads are modified as follows;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
Heads Compensation Compensation
awarded by the modified by
tribunal this Court
Rs. Rs.
Loss of dependancy 7,20,000/- 6,72,000
Loss of Consortium to 20,000 23,000
the wife/1st
respondent
Loss of Love and 30,000 40,000
affection to the
respondents 2 & 3
Funeral Expenses 5,000/- 15,000
Loss of Estate .... 15,000
Pain and suffering ... 10,000
Total 7,75,000/- 7,75,000/-
12. In view of the modification under various heads, the
claimants are entitled compensation amount of Rs.7,75,000/- along
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum as awarded by the
tribunal.
13. The appellant /transport corporation is directed to deposit
the entire compensation amount along with interest as awarded by
the tribunal, less the amount already deposited, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
On such deposit, the respondents 1 to 3/claimants are permitted to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
withdraw the compensation along with interest and costs as per the
apportionment fixed by the tribunal, after adjusting the amount, if
any, already withdrawn, by filing necessary applications before the
Tribunal.
14. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.
The judgment and decree dated 03.06.2010 passed by the tribunal
in M.C.O.P.No185 of 2009 is confirmed. No costs.
25.02.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet : yes
ak
To
1. The Additional District Court, Fast Track Court No.I,
(Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal)
Erode.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1225 of 2011
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.,
ak
CMA.No.1225 of 2011
25.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
