Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs M.Sumathi on 8 January, 2021
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
AND M.P.Nos. 1& 1 of 2012 and 2 & 2 of 2012
The Managing Director,
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation
Bangalore,
Karnataka State .. Appellant in both CMAs
Vs.
1. M.Sumathi ..Respondent in CMA.No.3593 of 2012
2. Sundaramal ..Respondent in CMA.No.3594 of 2012
Common Prayer: These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arefiled
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the
common judgment and decree dated 09.07.2004, made in
MCOP.Nos. 279 of 2004 and 280 of 2004, on the file of the
Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
For Appellant : M/s. T.Thiyagarajan
in both CMAs
For Respondent
in CMA.3593/2012: Mr.M.Sivakumar
For Respondent
in CMA.3594/2012: No Appearance
COMMON JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
The appellant/Trasnsport Corporation has filed these appeals
against the common award passed by the tribunal in MCOP.Nos.
279 of 2004 and 280 of 2004 dated 09.07.2004 on the file of the
Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri.
Brief facts of the case :
2. On 13.10.2003 the claimants have boarded into the
KSRTC bus at Kalasipalayam to go to Chandapura, at about 2.45
pm, when the bus was going towards Housr NH7 Main Road, near
Agraharam, a lorry which was coming behind the KRSTC bus and
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
tried to overtake the bus by giving necessary signal. But the
driver of the KRSTC bus without observing any rules, drove the
bus in a rash and negligent manner and hit left side of the said
lorry and then hit rear side of the on going ITI company bus. Due
to the impact, the claimants and others, who were traveled in the
KSRTC bus sustained severe injuries. The accident had occurred
only due to rash and negligence driving on the part of the driver of
the KSRTC bus. Hence the claimants claimed Rs.1,00,000/- each
as compensation before the tribunal.
3. Before the Tribunal, the respondents/claimant examined
themselves as P.W.1 & PW2 and the doctor was examined as PW3
and marked documents as ExP1 to P7. No witnesses and
documents were marked by the appellant.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
4.The Tribunal after considering the pleadings, oral and
documentary evidence, fixed liability on the driver of KSRTC burs
and awarded compensation of Rs. 49,500/- to the claimant in
MCOP.No.279 OF 2004 and a sum of Rs. 67,500/- to the claimant
in MCOP.No. 280 of 2014 together with interest at 7.5% per
annum payable by the Appellant Transport Corporation.
5.Challenging the liability fastened on them, the appellant -
Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
respondents/claimants have obtained compensation by fraud and
no such accident had happened as narrated by the claimants. The
entire claim made by the claimants was based on the false
documents and they have not filed any documents to prove that
they have travelled in the appeallant transport corporation bus on
the date of accident.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
7. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted
that they have filed a miscellaneous petition before this Court in
CMP.No.3 of 2012 to permit the appellant to file xerox copis
additional documents namely (1). Form TR-18 dated 15.11.2003,
(2). Statement given by the conductor Puspavathi, dated
28.10.2003, (3). Report given by the reported dated 12.11.2003
and (4). Statement given by the driver dated 17.11.2003. The
learned counsel for the appellant has also produced a letter dated
13.11.2006 issued by the Venkateshwara Health Centre,
Bangalore, wherein it has been stated that the claimants were not
given treatment in the said hospital and there was no entry in MLC
register as on 13.10.2003. These documents are filed along with
this appeal and they were not able to produce the said documents
before the tribunal, hence the award passed by the tribunal is
liable to be setaside.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
8. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent/claimant would submit that the tribunal has rightly
passed the award by considering the oral and documentary
evidence. Further, if the said documents are really necessary, they
should have file the same before the tribunal before passing the
award, without doing so, the appellant corporation has now filed
some documents alleging the claim made by the claimant as fraud.
The said contention cannot be accepted and the appeal is liable to
be dismissed.
9. Though the tribunal has awarded compensation to the
claimants by relying upon the documents and assesing the
percentage of disability, in view of filing additional documents
before this Court by the appellant transport corporation alleging
that the respondent/claimant has made false claim, this Court
straight away cannot consider the same in the appeal and give
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
findings. Therefore, this Court is of the view that an opportunity
shall be given to the appellant to prove their case before the
tribunal by marking these documents.
10. In the result, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are
allowed. The common award passed by the tribunal in
MCOP.No.279 of 2004 & 280 of 2004 dated 01.12.2005 is set
aside. The tribunal is directed to consider afresh the claim made
by the claimants by marking the documents relied upon the
appellant corporation after giving due opportunities to the
claimants to prove the genuiness of the said documents. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed
08.01.2021
Index : Yes
ak
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
ak
To
1.The Additional Special Judge,
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras
C.M.A. No.3593 & 3594 of 2012
AND
M.P.Nos. 1& 1 of 2012
and 2 & 2 of 2012
08.01.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
