The Managing Director vs Mathalaimary
2021 Latest Caselaw 5265 Mad

                                                                          C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 01.03.2021

                                                    CORAM:

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                              C.M.A. No.621 of 2021


                   The Managing Director,
                   Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
                   Salem Division – II, Salem Main Road,
                   Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri District.                       .. Appellant

                                                        Vs.

                   1.Mathalaimary
                   2.Nirmala
                   3.Jayaraj
                   4.Minor Agneshmary
                   (Minor rep. By next friend & mother, 1st respondent)        .. Respondents


                   Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor

                   Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 06.12.2013, made

                   in M.C.O.P. No.361 of 2012, on the file of the Principal District Court,

                   (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Dharmapuri.


                   ___
                   1/8




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                             C.M.A.No.621 of 2021



                                         For Appellant     : Mr. D.Venkatachalam

                                                 JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-

Transport Corporation challenging the quantum of compensation granted by

the Tribunal in the award dated 06.12.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.361 of

2012, on the file of the Principal District Court, (Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal), Dharmapuri.

2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P. No.361 of 2012, on the

file of the Principal District Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),

Dharmapuri. The respondents/claimants filed the said claim petition, claiming

a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Selvaraj who

died in the accident that took place on 22.11.2011.

3.According to the respondents, on the date of accident, the deceased

was proceeding in his Bicycle in Adhiyamankottai-Palacode main road, near

Kadagathur pirivu road in front of I.T.I, when he crossed the road from the

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

Eastern side towards Northern side and proceeded about 100 feet towards

Palacode at the left end of the road, the driver of a Bus bearing Registration

No.TN-29-N-2173 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation coming

from Adhiyamankottai side towards Palacode side, drove the same in a rash

and negligent manner, without sounding horn and dashed against the said

Selvaraj and caused the accident. In the accident, the said Selvaraj sustained

fatal injuries. The accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by

driver of the Bus. Hence, the respondents filed the 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, the driver of the Bus

drove the vehicle with due care and caution. The deceased/cyclist came from

the right side without caring the oncoming vehicles on the main road,

suddenly crossed the road from right side to left side and dashed against the

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

Bus and caused the accident. The accident occurred only due to the

negligence of the deceased/cyclist. Hence, the appellant is not liable to pay

any compensation to the respondents. 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 3rd respondent examined himself as P.W.1,

one Subramani, eye-witness was examined as P.W.2 and 7 documents were

marked as Exs.P1 to P7. The appellant examined the driver of the Bus

involved in the accident as R.W.1, but did not mark any documents.

6.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent

driving by driver of the Bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation

and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.7,40,000/- as compensation to

the respondents.

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

7.Questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in

the award dated 06.12.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.361 of 2012, the appellant

– Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.

8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport

Corporation contended that the respondents failed to prove the age, avocation

and income of the deceased by any oral and documentary evidence. In the

absence of any evidence, the Tribunal ought not to have fixed the annual

income of the deceased as Rs.54,000/-, which is excessive. The amounts

awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium and loss of love and

affection are excessive and prayed for reducing the compensation granted by

the Tribunal.

9.Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport

Corporation and perused the materials available on record.

10.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of

the respondents that at the time of accident, the deceased Selvaraj was doing

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

Agriculture as well as Goat Rearing and was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per

month. The respondents failed to prove the same. In the absence of any

material evidence to prove the income of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed a

sum of Rs.4,500/- per month as notional income of the deceased. The

accident is of the year 2011. Considering the year of accident and nature of

work done by the deceased, the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is not

excessive. The Tribunal has awarded an excessive sum of Rs.50,000/-

towards loss of consortium to the 1st respondent, wife of the deceased. The

Tribunal has awarded a meagre sum of Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses

and has not awarded any amount for loss of estate. In view of the same, the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal for loss of consortium is not interfered

with. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under other conventional heads

are just and reasonable and hence, there is no error in the award of the

Tribunal, warranting interference by this Court.

11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.7,40,000/- together with interest at the

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit is

confirmed. The appellant-Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the

award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount 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.361 of 2012. On such deposit,

the respondents 1 to 3 are permitted to withdraw their share of the award

amount, along 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. The

shares of the minor 4th respondent is directed to be deposited in any one of the

Nationalized Bank, till the minor attains majority. The 1st respondent, mother

of the minor 4th respondent is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest, once

in three months for the welfare of the minor 4th respondent. No costs.

01.03.2021

Index : Yes/No gsa

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.621 of 2021

V.M.VELUMANI, J.,

gsa

To

1.The Principal District Judge, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Dharmapuri.

2.The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court, Madras.

C.M.A. No.621 of 2021

01.03.2021

___

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/