The Managing Director vs Jayapriya
2021 Latest Caselaw 5129 Mad

                                                                      C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 26.02.2021

                                                    CORAM:

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                              C.M.A.No.488 of 2021
                                                      and
                                              C.M.P.No.3080 of 2021

                   The Managing Director
                   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                      (Division I) Ltd.
                   3/137, Salamedu, Vazhudhareddy
                   Villupuram.                                           .. Appellant


                                                      Vs.


                   Minor. Jayapriya
                   (Represented by Guardian, next friend
                   mother Parimala Gandhi)

                   (Minor Jayapriya name changed major
                   Jayapriya amended as per order in
                   I.A.No.421 of 2017, dated 03.07.2018)


                   Jayapriya                                            .. Respondent




                   1/9


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                    C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

                   Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor

                   Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 01.09.2018

                   made in M.C.O.P.No.567 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

                   Tribunal, Principal Sub Court, Cuddalore.

                                             For Appellant     : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar


                                                       JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the

appellant/Transport Corporation to set aside the award dated 01.09.2018

made in M.C.O.P.No.567 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Principal Sub Court, Cuddalore.

2.The appellant/Transport Corporation is respondent in

M.C.O.P.No.567 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Principal Sub Court, Cuddalore. The minor respondent, who was represented

by her mother Parimala Gandhi, filed the said claim petition claiming a sum

of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by her in the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

accident that took place on 21.11.2011.

3. According to the respondent, on the date of accident i.e., on

21.11.2011 at about 16.45 hours, while she was getting into the bus

belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation on Ulundurpet bus stop, the

driver of the bus started the bus suddenly at high speed in a rash and

negligent manner before the respondent getting into the bus. Due to the said

impact, the respondent fell down from the bus and thus, the accident

occurred. In the accident, the respondent sustained multiple injuries all over

the body and therefore, filed the claim petition claiming compensation against

the appellant.

4.The appellant/Transport corporation filed counter statement denying

the averments made by the respondent and contended that the driver of the

bus drove the bus with due care and caution. He did not start and drive the

bus in a rash and negligent manner at the time of accident. While the

respondent was getting into the bus, some of the school students pushed her

down and due to which, she sustained injuries. The respondent has also filed

another M.C.O.P.No.205 of 2012 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

I Additional Sub Court, Villupuram claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as

compensation for the same accident. Therefore, the appellant is not liable to

pay any compensation to the respondent. In any event, the total

compensation claimed by the respondent is excessive and prayed for

dismissal of the claim petition.

5.Before the Tribunal, the respondent examined herself as P.W.1 and

five documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P5. The appellant/Transport

Corporation examined one Solaimuthu, the driver of the bus as R.W.1, but did

not file any document. The disability certificate of the respondent was marked

as Ex.C1.

6.The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by

the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and

directed the appellant/Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.9,40,384/- as

compensation to the respondent.

7.To set aside the said award dated 01.09.2018 made in

M.C.O.P.No.567 of 2013, the appellant/Transport Corporation has come out

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

with the present appeal.

8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation contended that the Tribunal failed to note that the evidence of the

respondent as P.W.1 has not been corroborated by any other independent

witness. Mere registering of F.I.R. against the driver of the bus cannot be a

ground for fixing negligence on him. The learned counsel further contended

that the Tribunal failed to note that no valid document was filed by the

respondent to prove her age. The Tribunal erred in fixing a sum of Rs.6,000/-

as monthly income of the respondent, which is excessive. The amounts

awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are excessive and prayed for

setting aside the award of the Tribunal.

9.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation and perused the entire materials available on record.

10.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of

the respondent that while she was getting into the bus belonging to the

appellant/Transport Corporation, the driver of the bus suddenly started the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

bus at high speed and drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, due to

which, the respondent fell down from the bus and thus, the accident has

occurred. In the accident, the respondent sustained injuries. To substantiate

this case, the respondent examined herself as P.W.1 and deposed as per the

averments made in the claim petition and marked F.I.R., which was registered

against the driver of the bus as Ex.P1. On the other hand, it is the contention

of the appellant that while the respondent was getting into the bus, some of

the school students pushed her down and due to which, she sustained injuries.

To substantiate this contention, the appellant examined the driver of the bus

as R.W.1, who deposed as per the averments made in the counter statement.

The appellant has not let in any independent evidence to prove that the

accident has occurred due to negligence of the respondent and has not filed

any documentary evidence to prove their contention. The driver of the bus

has also not filed any objection to the contents of F.I.R. and has not lodged

any complaint against the respondent. Further, the injuries sustained by the

respondent are grievous in nature and the same is evident from Ex.P5/photos

of the respondent. The Tribunal considering the evidence of P.W.1,

Ex.P1/F.I.R. and in the absence of any independent witness on the part of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

appellant, held that the driver of the bus belonging to the

appellant/Transport Corporation was responsible for the accident and directed

the appellant to pay compensation to the respondent. There is no error in

the said finding of the Tribunal warranting interference by this Court.

11.As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, at the time of

accident, the respondent was studying X standard. In the accident, she

suffered fractures on left tibia, left pubic rami bone, left clavicle and grievous

injuries all over the body and underwent surgeries. The respondent has taken

treatment as in-patient in Jipmer hospital, Pondicherry, for ten days.

Ex.C1/Disability certificate shows that she suffered 51% disability. The

Tribunal converted the disability as 30% for whole body. The Tribunal

considering the age of the respondent, educational qualification and marriage

prospects, fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- as monthly income of the respondent and

adopted multiplier method while awarding compensation towards loss of

earning capacity. The Tribunal considering the age, disability, nature of

injuries and period of treatment taken by the appellant, awarded

compensation under different heads, which are not excessive warranting

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

interference by this Court.

12.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

sum of Rs.9,40,384/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the

respondent along with interest and costs is confirmed. The

appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire amount

awarded by the Tribunal along with interest and costs, less the amount

already deposited, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the respondent is

permitted to withdraw the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal along with

interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. Consequently,

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

26.02.2021 Index : Yes / No kj

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

To

1.The Principal Subordinate Judge (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Cuddalore.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Chennai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.488 of 2021

V.M.VELUMANI,J.

kj

C.M.A.No.488 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.3080 of 2021

26.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/