Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Subramanian on 25 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A. No.4446 of 2019
and C.M.P. No.25198 of 2019
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore Division - I) Limited,
Coimbatore 43. .. Appellant
Vs.
1.Subramanian
2.Annapoorni .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 15.04.2014, made
in M.C.O.P. No.1122 of 2011, on the file of the Sub Court, (Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal), Tiruppur.
For Appellant : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Yuaraj
___
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-
Transport Corporation against the judgment and decree dated 15.04.2014,
made in M.C.O.P. No.1122 of 2011, on the file of the Sub Court, (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal), Tiruppur.
2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P. No.1122 of 2011, on the
file of the Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Tiruppur. The
respondents/claimants filed the said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the death of their son viz., Govindaraj,
who died in the accident that took place on 29.05.2011.
3.According to the respondents, on the date of accident, when the
deceased was riding his Two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-37-AV-
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
4892 from South to North in the Amparapalayam to Chetthumadai road, near
PAP Colony, Vettaiyanpudhur, the driver of Bus bearing Registration No.TN-
38-N-0898 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation coming from
North to South, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed on
the Two wheeler driven by the deceased and caused the accident. The
accident occurred due to negligent driving by driver of the Bus. In the
accident, the deceased succumbed to fatal injuries. Hence, the respondents
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 respondents in the claim petition.
According to the appellant, on the date of accident, after alighting passengers
at PAP Bus stop, when the Bus was driven by its driver carefully at the left
hand side of the 100 feet road, the deceased rode the Motorcycle bearing
Registration No.TN-37-AV-4892 at a hectic speed, in rash and negligent
manner at the right hand side of the road in opposite direction. On seeing this,
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
the driver of the Bus hooted horn and swerved the Bus into his extreme left
and halted the Bus in order to avoid any accident. Inspite of that, the deceased
dashed at the front right corner of the stationed Bus and caused the accident.
FIR was also registered against the deceased based on the evidence of an eye-
witness. The claim petition is bad for non-joinder of insurer of the
Motorcycle. The deceased did not possess valid driving license at the time of
accident. The respondents have to prove the age, avocation and income of the
deceased to claim compensation. In any event, the total compensation
claimed by the respondents is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim
petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1,
examined two eye witnesses viz., Mahalingam and Kanagaraj as P.W.2 and
P.W.3 respectively and 5 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P5. The
appellant examined the Conductor of the Bus involved in the accident as
R.W.1, but did not mark any documents.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
6.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that accident occurred due to negligence of both the driver of
the Bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation as well as
deceased/rider of the Two wheeler and fixed contributory negligence as 75:25
and awarded a sum of Rs.15,35,000/- as compensation to the respondents.
The Tribunal directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.11,51,250/-, being
75% of the award amount as compensation to the respondents.
7.Against the said award of the Tribunal dated 15.04.2014, made in
M.C.O.P. No.1122 of 2011, the appellant – Transport Corporation has come
out with the present appeal.
8.Though the appellant-Transport Corporation raised various grounds
with regard to negligence, at the time of arguments, the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant restricted his arguments only with regard to
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The learned counsel
appearing for the appellant contended that in the absence of any materials to
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
prove the age, avocation and income of the deceased, the Tribunal
erroneously fixed the age of the deceased and fixed a sum of Rs.10,000/- per
month as notional income of the deceased. The notional income fixed and the
amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of love and affection are
excessive. The Tribunal having arrived at a sum of Rs.14,35,000/- as
compensation, committed calculation error and erroneously has granted a sum
of Rs.15,35,000/- as compensation and directed the appellant to pay a sum of
Rs.11,51,250/-, being 75% of the compensation to the respondents and hence,
prayed for setting aside the award of the Tribunal.
9.Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation as well as the respondents and perused the materials available on
record.
10. From the materials on record, it is seen that the deceased was aged
27 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal while applying the multiplier,
has taken into consideration the age of 2nd respondent/mother of the deceased
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
and granted compensation. In view of the same, the amount granted by the
Tribunal under conventional heads is not interfered with. As per the award,
the appellant is liable to pay only 75% of the compensation to the
respondents. The Tribunal while arriving at the compensation amount,
erroneously mentioned the award amount as Rs.15,35,000/- instead of
Rs.14,35,000/- and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.11,51,250/-,
being 75% of the compensation to the respondents. The said mistake of
calculation is rectified and appellant is hereby directed to pay a sum of
Rs.10,76,250/-, being 75% of the award amount (Rs.14,35,000/-) as
compensation to the respondents.
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.15,35,000/- is modified to
Rs.14,35,000/- 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 a sum of Rs.10,76,250/-, being 75% of the award amount
along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, within a
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to
the credit of M.C.O.P. No.1122 of 2011. On such deposit, the respondents are
permitted to withdraw their respective share of the award amount with
proportionate interest and costs, as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by the
Tribunal, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn, by filing
necessary applications before the Tribunal. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
25.01.2021
Index : Yes/No
gsa
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Tiruppur.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.4446 of 2019
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
C.M.A. No.4446 of 2019
25.01.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
