Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs (Minor on 7 January, 2021
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED 07.01.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MD)No.50 of 2010
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
Managing Director,
Karaikudi
.. Appellant
vs.
Minor T.Rajaram
rep. by his father Thenpandian.
(Minor respondent is declared as major
vide order dated 07.01.2021)
...Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act 1988 against the judgment and award made in MCOP No.
918 of 2005 dated 28.03.2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
For Appellant : Mr.N.Asaithambi
For Respondent : Mr.R.Govindaraj
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub-Court, Madurai in MCOP No.
918 of 2005, dated 28.03.2008.
2.The facts in brief is that it is case of injury and the victim is a
minor boy aged about 13 years. It is his case that on 23.12.2004, he was
riding his bicycle from Kandanur to Karuviapatti carefully and observing
traffic rules and at about 4.00 p.m, when he was approaching near Dean
Theatre bus stop, a bus belonging to the Transport Corporation bearing
registration No.TN-67-N-0028, which was driven by its driver in a most
rash and negligent manner, hit against the cycle. In the impact, he was
thrown away from the bicycle and he sustained injuries. Immediately, he
was taken to Government Hospital, Karaikudi and thereafter, he took
treatment at Jawahar Hospital, Madurai and CMC Hospital at Vellore.
The claimant would further state that he was studying 8th Standard at the
relevant point of time and he is a brilliant student in the studies, however,
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
due to the accident, his educational career has been totally spoiled and he
lost his amenities.
3.The appellant herein resisted the claim petition contending that
the claimant has suppressed the real manner in which, the accident had
taken place and invented story so as to suit his claim of compensation.
The accident did not happen in a rash and negligent driving of the driver
of the bus, but on the other hand, it happened due to carelessness of the
claimant and hence, Transport Corporation is not liable to pay any
compensation and they have also disputed the age and the claim was
excessive and exorbitant.
4.In order to prove the case of the claimant, three witnesses were
examined and as many as 21 documents were produced. On the side of
the appellant, one Shanmugam was examined as R.W.1 and no
documentary evidence was produced. On appreciation of evidence
adduced by the parties, the Tribunal held that the driver of the bus was
responsible for the accident and awarded Rs.4,72,700/- against the claim
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
of Rs.8,00,000/-. Aggrieved over the Judgment and award, the present
appeal has been filed.
5.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the materials available on record.
6.The father of the claimant gave evidence as P.W.1 and the
claimant was examined as P.W.2. Both P.Ws.1 and 2, in their evidence,
have narrated the manner of accident and the injuries sustained by P.W.2
and the treatment taken by P.W.2. Taking note of the facts that the
criminal was registered against the driver of the bus and the claimant has
produced Ex.P.1-First Information Report, the Tribunal choose to accept
the evidence of the injured claimant and held that the driver of the bus
caused the accident.
7.Exs.P.4, P.7 and P.10 would reveal that P.W.2 initially took
treatment at Government Hospital and thereafter, he was admitted in the
Jawahar Hospital and readmitted twice in the same Hospital, Madurai
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
and he had taken treatment from 22.12.2004 to 17.02.2005 and
27.06.2005 to 30.06.2005 and thereafter, he was moved to CMC hospital,
where he took treatment from 17.10.2005 to 30.10.2005 and 23.06.2006
to 30.06.2006. It is also evident from the testimony of P.Ws.1 and 2 that
the claimant was 13 years on the date of accident and he was studying 8th
Standard and because of the injuries sustained by him, he had difficulties
to pass urine and a tube was fixed. Dr.Peter Josep (P.W.3) would state
that the claimant has suffered 53% disability. Ex.P.17 is the Disability
Certificate.
8.Perusal of Exa.P.5, P.6, P.8, P.12 and P.21 would show that on
different dates, the claimant had spent Rs.3,42,722/- towards medical
expenses. Despite treatment, he was not able to control urine and he has
permanently used a kid to store urine. Based on the above evidence, the
Tribunal awarded Rs.3,46,700/- for medical expenses; Rs.12,000/- for
transport expenses; Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment; Rs.1,000/-
towards damage of cloth and bicycles; Rs.15,000/- towards pain and
suffering; Rs.43,000/- towards permanent disability and Rs.50,000/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
towards loss of amenities. In total, the Tribunal awarded Rs.4,72,700/-
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
9.Considering the age and the nature of disability suffered by the
minor injured claimant, I am of the view that the award cannot be said to
be excessive or exorbitant as alleged by the appellant/Transport
Corporation. I find no merits in the appeal. Hence, the Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
10.Further, it is seen from the records that on the date of filing of
the claim petition on 22.03.2005, the respondent/claimant was 13 years
old and now he has attained the age of majority. Hence, the
respondent/claimant is declared as major.
11.In that view, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed, as
devoid of merits. Since the appeal is dismissed, the appellant/Transport
Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued
interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
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.
07.01.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
skn
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA(MD)No.50 of 2010
K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J
skn
JUDGMENT MADE IN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (MD)No.50 of 2010
07.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
