Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs P.Kalimuthu on 11 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.25 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited,
Periyamelaguparai,
Trichy. .. Appellant
Vs.
P.Kalimuthu .. Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
21.10.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2017 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Jayankondam (M.C.O.P.No.87 of
2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District
and Sessions Court, Ariyalur).
For Appellant : Ms.P.Rajathi
for Mr.D.Raghu
1/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
2.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the award
dated 21.10.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2017 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Jayankondam (M.C.O.P.No.87 of
2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District
and Sessions Court, Ariyalur).
3.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2017 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Jayankondam,
(M.C.O.P.No.87 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Principal District and Sessions Court, Ariyalur). Originally the respondent
filed the claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.87 of 2015 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District and Sessions Court, Ariyalur,
claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained
by him in the accident that took place on 10.06.2013. Thereafter as per the
proceedings of the Principal District Judge, Ariyalur in Proceedings No.7267
of 2017 dated 26.04.2017, the said M.C.O.P.No.87 of 2015 on the file of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District and Sessions Court,
Ariyalur was transferred to the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub
Court, Jayankondam and renumbered as M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2017.
4.According to respondent, on 10.06.2013 at about 06.00 A.M., while
he was riding his Hero Honda Splendor Plus motorcycle bearing Registration
No.TN 61 C 9573 along with his paternal uncle as pillion rider from
Thularankurichi to Vallam on Koovagam Road, near Kongana Siddhar
Temple curve, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant, who was driving
the bus from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner dashed
against the respondent and caused the accident. In the accident, the
respondent and his paternal uncle fell down from the motorcycle and
sustained multiple injuries all over their body. Immediately after the accident,
the respondent was taken to Government General Hospital, Jayankondam for
first aid treatment. Thereafter he was referred to Tanjore Government
Medical College Hospital, Tanjore and further he was shifted to Kannan
Hospital, Tanjore for medical treatment. Therefore, the respondent filed the
said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the
injuries sustained by him against the appellant-Transport Corporation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
5.The appellant-Transport Corporation filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondent. According to the appellant,
the driver of the bus drove the same at a moderate speed and while the bus
was proceeding near Chitrakoil, the respondent who was riding the
motorcycle along with two pillion riders, came from the opposite direction in
a curve road in a rash and negligent manner. On seeing the negligent riding
by the respondent, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant, switched the
head lights of the bus 'on' and 'off' and turned the bus to the extreme left side,
applied brakes and stopped the bus on the extreme left side of the mud road.
Inspite of the precautions taken by the driver of the bus to avert the accident,
the respondent rode the motorcycle on the wrong side and dashed against the
front right corner of the bus and caused the accident. The accident has
occurred only due to negligence on the part of the respondent and hence, the
appellant is not liable to pay any compensation to the respondent. In the
F.I.R., the respondent has stated that three persons were travelling in the
motorcycle at the time of accident, whereas, in the claim petition, the
respondent has mentioned that only two persons were travelling in the
motorcycle at the time of accident. There is a contradiction in F.I.R. and
claim petition with regard to number of persons travelling in the motorcycle
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
and hence, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant is no way responsible
for the accident. The respondent was not possessing valid driving license at
the time of accident. The appellant-Transport Corporation denied the age,
avocation, income, nature of injuries, disability and period of treatment taken
by the respondent. In any event, the quantum of compensation claimed by the
respondent is highly excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
6.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1
and Dr.T.Kanmani was examined as P.W.2 and 15 documents were marked as
Exs.P1 to P15. On behalf of the appellant, one Sankaran, driver of the bus
belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation was examined as R.W.1 and no
documentary 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
and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.3,03,211/- as compensation to
the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
8.Against the said award dated 21.10.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of
2017, the appellant-Transport Corporation has come out with the present
appeal.
9.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the
accident has occurred only due to the negligence on the part of the
respondent. The Tribunal erroneously fixed negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation and directed
the appellant to pay the compensation to the respondent. The Tribunal in the
absence of any material evidence with regard to avocation and income, fixed
a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month as notional income of the respondent, which is
excessive. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.3,03,211/-
is excessive and prayed for setting aside the award passed by the Tribunal.
10.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the entire materials on record.
11.From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the case
of the respondent that while he was riding his motorcycle on the left hand
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
side of the road, the driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport
Corporation drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed on the
motorcycle in which the respondent was riding and caused the accident. In
the accident, he sustained injuries. In support of his claim, he examined
himself as P.W.1 and marked F.I.R., which was registered against the driver
of the bus as Ex.P1. On the other hand, it is the case of the appellant that
while the bus was proceeding near Chitrakoil at a moderate speed, the
respondent along with two pillion riders who was riding the motorcycle from
the opposite direction in a curve road in a rash and negligent manner and on
seeing this, the driver of the bus sounded horn, switched the head light of the
bus 'on' and 'off' and turned the bus to the extreme left side of the mud road,
applied brake and stopped the bus. Inspite of the same, the respondent dashed
against the front right corner of the bus which was stopped on the extreme
left side of the mud road. The driver of the bus belonging to appellant-
Transport Corporation was not responsible for the accident. In support of
their case, the appellant examined the driver of the bus as R.W.1. The
appellant or the driver of the bus has not lodged any complaint against the
respondent or has not filed any objection to the F.I.R., which was registered
against the driver of the bus. The appellant also has not filed any document to
prove that the charges laid against the driver of the bus was not correct.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
Further R.W.1 in his evidence admitted that the appellant initiated
disciplinary proceedings against him and he was given warning. The Tribunal
considering the evidence of P.W.1, R.W.1, Ex.P1/F.I.R. and other materials,
held that accident has occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by
R.W.1/driver of the bus belonging to appellant-Transport Corporation. There
is no error in the said finding of the Tribunal warranting interference by this
Court.
12.As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, it is the case of the
respondent that in the accident he suffered fracture of right leg and multiple
grievous injuries all over his body. To prove the nature of injuries and
disability suffered by him, the appellant examined himself as P.W.1 and
Dr.T.Kanmani as P.W.2. P.W.2/Doctor examined the respondent and
certified that respondent suffered 32% disability and issued Ex.P15/disability
certificate to that effect. The Tribunal considering the nature of injuries,
evidence of P.W.2/Doctor and Ex.P15/disability certificate, awarded a sum of
Rs.96,000/- towards disability at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of
disability. It is the contention of the respondent that he was aged 32 years,
working as a Mason and also an Agriculturist and was earning a sum of
Rs.15,000/- per month. He has not filed any document to prove the avocation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
and income. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to avocation
and income, the Tribunal considering the age, year of accident and nature of
work done by the respondent, fixed a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month as notional
income of the respondent. The accident occurred in the year 2013 and the
notional income fixed by the Tribunal is not excessive. The Tribunal
considering the entire materials on record, has awarded a sum of
Rs.3,03,211/- as compensation to the respondent under different heads which
are not excessive warranting interference by this Court.
13.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and a
sum of Rs.3,03,211/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the
respondent, along with interest and costs is confirmed. The appellant-
Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the award amount along with
interest and costs, less the amout if any already deposited, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit
of M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Sub Court, Jayankondam. On such deposit, the respondent is
permitted to withdraw the award amount along with interest and costs, after
adjusting the amount, if any already withdrawn, by filing necessary
applications before the Tribunal. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
Petition is closed. No costs.
11.01.2021
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Jayankondam.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.2 of 2021
11.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
