Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Chandra @ Sankari on 22 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
and
M.P.No.22315 of 2019
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Coimbatore Division,
Coimbatore, Mettupalayam Road,
Coimbatore – 43. .. Appellant
Vs.
1.Chandra @ Sankari
2.Muthal
3.Vellingiri
4.Selvi .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
11.01.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.2239 of 2016 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and Sessions Court,
Tiruppur.
For Appellant : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
For Respondents : Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
2.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the award
dated 11.01.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.2239 of 2016 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and Sessions Court,
Tiruppur.
3.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P.No.2239 of 2016 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and
Sessions Court, Tiruppur. The respondents filed the said claim petition
claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one
Mahali, who died in the accident that took place on 07.04.2015.
4.According to respondents, on 07.04.2015 at about 14.45 hours, while
the deceased Mahali was crossing the Tiruppur – Avinashi Road near Gandhi
Nagar from East to West, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-
Transport Corporation drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
against the deceased and caused the accident. In the accident, the said Mahali
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
sustained fatal injuries and immediately after the accident, the said Mahali
was taken to Government Hospital, Tiruppur and therafter she was referred to
Government Hospital, Coimbatore. Inspite of treatment, the said Mahali
succumbed to injuries. Therefore, the respondents filed the said claim petition
claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation against the appellant-
Transport Corporation.
5.The appellant-Transport Corporation filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondents. According to the
appellant, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation
drove the same cautiously by observing the road traffic rules. The deceased
only suddenly crossed the road without noticing the oncoming bus, dashed on
the bus and invited the accident. The accident has not occurred as alleged by
the respondents, whereas the accident has occurred only due to the negligence
on the part of the deceased. The respondents have to prove the age, avocation
and income of the deceased by producing valid documents. The respondents
have to prove that they are the legal heirs of the deceased by producing valid
legal heirship certificate. In any event, the quantum of compensation claimed
by the respondents is highly excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim
petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
6.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined herself as P.W.1
and one Karuppusamy, eyewitness to the accident was examined as P.W.2
and 5 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P5. On behalf of the appellant,
one Ravikumar, Driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport
Corporation was examined as R.W.1 and no documentary evidence was let in.
7.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,
awarded a sum of Rs.7,29,000/- as compensation and directed the appellant to
pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation to the respondents.
8.Against the said award dated 11.01.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.2239
of 2016, the appellant has come out with the present appeal.
9.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the Tribunal erroneously fixed negligence on the
part of the driver of the bus only based on Ex.P1/F.I.R., which was registered
against him. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to avocation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
and income, a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month fixed by the Tribunal as notional
income of the deceased is excessive. The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is highly excessive and prayed for setting aside the award passed by
the Tribunal.
10.Per contra, Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents contended that the accident has occurred only due to the
negligence on the part of the driver of the bus belonging to appellant. The
Tribunal considering the evidence of P.W.2 and Ex.P1/F.I.R., held that the
accident has occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the driver of
the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation and the same is in
order. The deceased was aged 65 years, working as Agricultural Coolie and
was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month. But the Tribunal has fixed only
a meagre sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased.
The Tribunal ought to have awarded the entire award amount of
Rs.7,29,000/- as compensation to the respondents instead of granting
Rs.7,00,000/-. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
different heads is not excessive and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
11.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the entire
materials on record.
12.From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the
contention of the respondents that while the deceased Mahali was crossing
the Tiruppur – Avinashi Road near Gandhi Nagar from East to West, the
driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation drove the bus
in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased and caused the
accident. To prove the said contention, the 1st respondent examined herself as
P.W.1 and one Karuppusamy, eyewitness to the accident was examined as
P.W.2 and marked F.I.R., which was registered against the driver of the bus
belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation as Ex.P1. On the other hand, it
is the case of the appellant-Transport Corporation that the deceased only
suddenly crossed the road without noticing the oncoming bus, dashed on the
bus and invited the accident. To prove their case, the driver of the bus was
examined as R.W.1. The appellant-Transport Corporation neither examined
any eyewitness to the accident nor filed any objection to the F.I.R., which
was registered against the driver of the bus belonging to appellant. Further,
R.W.1-driver of the bus was an interested witness. The Tribunal considering
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, Ex.P1/F.I.R., R.W.1 and failure on the part of
the appellant-Transport Corporation for not filing any objection to the F.I.R.,
held that accident has occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation. There is
no error in the said finding of the Tribunal warranting interference by this
Court.
13.As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, it is the contention
of the respondents that the deceased was aged 65 years, working as
Agricultural Coolie and was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month. The
Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income of the
deceased. The accident occurred in the year 2017 and the notional income
fixed by the Tribunal is proper. The multiplier adopted and 1/4th deduction
made by the Tribunal are correct. The Tribunal after fixing monthly income
of the deceased at Rs.8,000/-, adopting multiplier '7' and deducting 1/4th
towards personal expenses, awarded a sum of Rs.5,04,000/- towards loss of
dependency and the same is just and reasonable. The Tribunal has awarded
excessive sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection and hence
the same is reduced to Rs.80,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount
towards loss of estate. The respondents are entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
towards loss of estate. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral
expenses and transportation are just and reasonable and hence, the same are
hereby confirmed. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
modified as follows:
S. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of dependency 5,04,000/- 5,04,000/- Confirmed
2. Loss of love and affection 2,00,000/- 80,000/- Reduced
3. Transportation 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
4. Funeral expenses 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
5. Loss of estate - 15,000/- Granted
Total Rs.7,29,000/- Rs.6,24,000/- Reduced by
rounded off to Rs.76,000/-
Rs.7,00,000/-
14.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.7,00,000/- is hereby reduced
to Rs.6,24,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of deposit. The appellant-Transport Corporation
is directed to deposit the modified award amount now determined by this
Court, 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.2239 of 2016 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and Sessions Court,
Tiruppur. On such deposit, the respondents are permitted to withdraw the
respective share of the modified award amount as per the ratio of
apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along with proportionate interest and
costs, less the amount if any already withdrawn by making necessary
applications before the Tribunal. The appellant-Transport Corporation is
permitted to withdraw the excess amount if any lying in the deposit to the
credit of M.C.O.P.No.2239 of 2016, if the entire award amount has already
been deposited by them. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition
is closed. No costs.
22.01.2021
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The II Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Tiruppur.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.3925 of 2019
22.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
