Madras High Court
The Wild Life Warden/Poy vs R.Muralikrishnan on 7 October, 2021
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A.Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
and CMP.Nos.2057 and 2066 of 2021
1.The Wild Life Warden/POY,
Indira Gandhi Wt.Sanctuary,
Now Known as
Deputy Director, Anaimalai Tiger Reserve,
Pollachi Division, No.365/1, Meenakarai Road,
Pollachi - 642 001,
Coimbatore District.
2.The State Rep. by The District Collector,
Coimbatore Taluk and District.
... Appellants in CMA.303 of 2021
Vs.
1. R.Muralikrishnan
2.K.Vijayan
...Respondents in CMA.303 of 2021
1.The Wild Life Warden/POY,
Indira Gandhi Wt.Sanctuary,
Now Known as
Deputy Director, Anaimalai Tiger Reserve,
Pollachi Division, No.365/1, Meenakarai Road,
Pollachi - 642 001,
Coimbatore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.1/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
2.The State Rep. by The District Collector,
Coimbatore Taluk and District. ... Appellants in CMA.305 of 2021
Vs.
1. Suganthi
2.Minor Dhanushree
3.Jamuna
4.Manoharan
(Minor Rep. by N.F. Guardian Mother Suganthi amended
occupation of the deceased as per order in I.A.No.1458/16, dated
08.08.2016).
5.K.Vijayan
...Respondents in CMA.305 of 2021
Prayer in CMA.No.303 of 2021: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, praying to set aside the
judgment and decree dated 04.12.2018, passed by the Special District
Judge, M.C.O.P Tribunal Salem, made in M.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2012.
Prayer in CMA.No.305 of 2021: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, praying to set aside the
judgment and decree dated 04.12.2018, passed by the Special District
Judge, M.C.O.P Tribunal Salem made in M.C.O.P.No.1082 of 2012.
In CMA.No.303 of 2021:
For Appellant : Mr.Edwin Prabhakar
For Respondents
for R1 : Mr.C.Kulanthaivel
for R2 : Mrs.Pooja Shree
for Mr.A.Parthasarathy
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.2/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
in CMA.No.305 of 2021:
For Appellant : Mr.Edwin Prabhakar
For Respondents
for R1 to R4 :Mr.K.Sathish Kumar
for R5 : Mrs.Pooja Shree
COMMON JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered V.SIVAGNANAM, J]
The appeals are heard through video conferencing.
2. Challenging the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Special District Judge, M.C.O.P Tribunal Salem, in
MCOP.Nos.1083 and 1082 of 2012, dated 04.12.2018, the present appeals
have been filed.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their
ranking before the Tribunal.
4. It is the case of the claimants that on 05.08.2011 at about 03.00
p.m., the deceased Sathiyamoorthy (M.C.O.P.No.1082 of 2012) was riding
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.3/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
his Bajaj Pulsar Motorcycle bearing registration No.TN-52-Z-5587 along
with the injured petitioner Muralikrishnan (M.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2012) as
pillion rider on Valparai to Salaiyaar Dam Road, and when they were
nearing a place just before 50 feet from Urulikkal Bus Stop, the third
respondent/driver of the Jeep bearing registration No.41G-0074 drove the
same from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and hit
against the motorcycle and caused the accident. Due to the impact, both the
rider and pillion rider were thrown away from the motorcycle and they fell
on the road. Immediately they were taken to Urulikkal Central Hospital,
where the Doctor declared that Sathiyamoorthy was brought dead and
Muralikrishnan, then referred to Government Hospital, Coimbatore and
admitted there as inpatient from 05.08.2011 to 20.08.2011. Hence, he laid
a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.20,11,850/- as compensation.
5. Resisting the claim made by the claimants, the appellant filed a
counter statement inter alia contending that the accident had not occurred
in the manner as projected by the claimants. They also denied the age,
occupation and income of the claimants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.4/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
6. In order to prove the claim before the Tribunal, the claimant
examined as PWs.1 to 7 were marked and Exs.P1 to P37 were marked and
Exs.X1 to X6 were marked and Exs.M.O.1 to M.O.4 were also marked. On
the side of the respondent Ex.R1 was marked.
7. The Tribunal after analysing the entire evidence came to the
conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the Bajaj Pulsar Motorcycle bearing registration
No.TN-52-Z-5587. By coming to such conclusion, the Tribunal passed an
award sums of Rs.20,40,000/- and Rs.20,11,850/- to the deceased and the
injured and directed the appellants to pay the above compensation. The
break-up details are as follows:
M.C.O.P.No.1082 of 2012:
Sl.No. Compensation awarded under the Amount
head (in Rs.)
1. Loss of dependency 18,90,000/-
2. Loss of love and affection 80,000/-
3. Loss of consortium 40,000/-
4. Funeral expenses 15,000/-
5. Loss of estate 15,000/-
Total 20,40,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.5/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
M.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2012:
Sl.No. Compensation awarded under the Amount
head (in Rs.)
1. Loss of permanent disability 17,13,600/-
2. Pain and suffering 75,000/-
3. Extra nourishment 25,000/-
4. Transport to hospital 20,000/-
5. Loss of amenities 50,000/-
6. Medical Bills 1,28,250/-
Total 20,11,850/-
8. Though the claimant has examined as PWs.4,5,7 and
produced Exs.P13, P23, P29, P32 and P37 to show that the injured has
suffered 50% disability, the Tribunal has taken the disability as 60% and
awarded Rs.17,13,600/- towards loss of earning capacity. A perusal of
records shows that the claimant was working as a Supervisor in a
construction company and he suffered head injury. There is no evidence that
he lost his employment due to the injury suffered in the accident. Without
notice, the Tribunal has applied 60% disability to arrive at loss of earning
capacity. The disability taken by the Tribunal is on the higher side. It is
appropriate to fix the disability at 40%. Though the injured claimant has
stated that he was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month by working as a
site Supervisor and examined the employee of the company and produced
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.6/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
salary certificate Ex.P14, the Tribunal has taken the income rightly at
Rs.10,000/- per month and 40% towards his future prospects and arrived at
income Rs.14,000/- by applying 40% disability. The amount would be
Rs.11,42,400/- (Rs.14,000/- *12*17*40/100). The amount awarded under
the other heads is hereby confirmed.
9. Mr.Edwin Prabakar, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant would fairly contended that the injured claimant has admitted that
the accident had taken place in a curve and the driver of the Jeep was also
acquitted by the Criminal Court. It is his submission that the entire
negligence has been fixed on the driver of the Jeep without any evidence
and justification.
10. We are unable to accept the contention of the learned
counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the finding of the Criminal
Court is not binding on the Tribunal.
11. It is an admitted fact that the injured claimant is an eye
witness to the incident and he narrated the manner of the accident in his
evidence. So we are confirming the finding of the Tribunal with regard to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.7/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
negligence. Accordingly, the amount awarded by the Tribunal in
M.C.O.P.No.1083 of 2012 is re-calculated as follows:
Sl.No. Compensation awarded under the Amount
head (in Rs.)
1. Loss of permanent disability 11,42,400/-
2. Pain and suffering 75,000/-
3. Extra nourishment 25,000/-
4. Transport to hospital 20,000/-
5. Loss of amenities 50,000/-
6. Medical Bills 1,28,250/-
Total 14,40,650/-
12. This Court finds that the Tribunal has passed a reasonable
award in M.C.O.P.No.1082 of 2012 and the same does not require any
interference by this Court.
13 . In view of the above modifications:
(i) CMA.No.303 of 2021 is partly allowed. The appellants are directed to
deposit the above modified award amount with accrued interest and
costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.8/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount, less the
amount already withdrawn, if any, together with interest and costs.
(ii) CMA.No.305 of 2021 is dismissed. The appellants are directed to
deposit the award amount with accrued interest and costs, less the
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The apportionment made by
the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. On deposit being made by the
appellants, the claimants 1, 3 and 4 are permitted to withdraw their
respective share, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, together
with interest and costs. Insofar as the second claimant/ minor is
concerned, his share shall be deposited by the Tribunal in any Fixed
Deposit Scheme in any one of the Nationalised Banks and it shall be
renewed periodically till they attain majority and the interest accrued
thereon shall be withdrawn by the first claimant/mother once in three
months. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions
are closed.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
07.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
ub
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.9/10
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
ub
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Special District Judge, M.C.O.P Tribunal, Salem.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
C.M.A. Nos.303 and 305 of 2021
07.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.10/10
