Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Kopperundevi on 21 January, 2021
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A(MD)No1094 of 2011
and
M.P(MD).No.1 of 2011
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Kumbakonam ... Appellant / 1st
Respondent
Vs.
1.Kopperundevi ... Respondent/
Petitioner
2.C.Muthuselvan
3.The United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
Trichy. ... Respondents/
1st and 2nd Respondents
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and degree
order dated 26.04.2006 in MCOP.No.856 of 2003 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Additional Sub Court, Thanjavur.
For Appellant :Mr.K.Gokul
For R-3 :Mr.A.S.Mathialagan
1
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
JUDGMENT
Challenging the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Court, Thanjavur in M.C.O.P.No.856
of 2003, dated 26.04.2006, the appellant/State Transport
Corporation has filed this appeal.
2.The first respondent herein filed a claim petition stating that
on 20.11.2001 at 02.00 pm., while she was traveling in a bus, which
is coming from Thanjavur to Trichy, bearing Registration No.TN 49 N
0743 belonged to the appellant, the driver of the bus drove it in a
rash and negligent manner and dashed against the lorry belonged to
the second respondent, in which, the first respondent sustained
multiple grievous injuries and fracture in her right leg. She was
immediately taken in Thanjavore Medical College Hospital,
thereafter, she was admitted as in-patient in Theiva Hospital and
from 09.03.2002 to 23.03.2002 she has taken treatment. She was
earning salary for a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month at the time of
accident. She spent Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses. In
view of the injury sustained in the accident, she lost his total
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
earning capacity. Hence, she claimed for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as
compensation.
3.The said claim was opposed by the first
respondent /appellant herein stating that the accident occurred only
due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry driver, hence no
liability can be fastened against them and prayed dismisal of the
petition.
4.The third respondent also opposed the claim of the first
respondent contending that the insurance company cannot be made
liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. It is also stated that
the claim is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5.Before the tribunal, to substantiate the case, on the side of
the claimant P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.11
were marked. On the side of the appellant/Transport Corporation,
no witness was examined and no document was marked.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
6.The tribunal on appreciation of the oral and documentary
evidence held that the driver of the apellant was responsible for the
accident and awarded compensation of Rs.1,18,500/- along with
interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. Challenging the award, the
appellant/Transport Corporaiton has filed the present appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and
perused the materials available on record.
8. A perusal of the First Inforamtion shows that the on
20.11.2001 at about 2.00 pm., when the lorry belonging to the
second respondent was stopped for changing the tire, the driver of
the bus drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against
the lorry. No rebuttal evidence was adduced to show that the driver
of the lorry dashed against the bus. Hence, the Tribunal came to
the conclusion that the driver of the bus is responsible for the
accident.
9.The tribunal found that the claimant sustained 30%
permanent disability, for which awarded Rs.15,000/-, Rs.12,000/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
towards pain and sufferings, Rs.12,000/- towards loss of amenities
and Rs.27,000/- towards medical expenses. Though it is contended
by the learned counsel for the appellant- transport corporation that
the award is on the higher side and requires reduction, this Court is
of the opinion that the award is fair and reasonable.
10. In that view, the Civill Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed,
as devoid of meirts. The appellant is directed to deposit the entire
award amount with accrued interst and costs, less the amount
already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the
claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount, less the
amount already withdrawn, if any, together with proportionate
interest and costs. No costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petiton is closed.
21.01.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
rmk
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J.
rmk
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Sub Court, Thanjavur.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
C.M.A(MD)No.1094 of 2011
21.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
