Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Minor J.Vimal Raj on 8 October, 2021
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Division - II,
Salem. .. Appellant
Vs.
1. Minor J.Vimal Raj
2. V.Nandagopal
3. Vanmathi Nandagopal
4. The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
490-A, First Floor, Avinashi Road,
(Nava India near), Coimbatore - 4.
5. E.Subramani .. Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking to set aside the Award and Decree dated
09.04.2007, made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.971 of 2004, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Coimbatore.
For Appellant : Mr.D.Raghu
-----
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
JUDGMENT
(The case has been heard through video conference)
This appeal has been filed by the transport corporation challenging the
Award dated 09.04.2007, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Subordinate Court, Coimbatore in M.C.O.P.No.971 of 2004.
2. The appellant transport corporation has challenged the impugned
award questioning the determination of composite negligence by the
Tribunal at the ratio of 50 : 50 between the bus owned by the appellant
transport corporation and the vehicle insured with the fourth respondent. The
appellant has also questioned the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
3. The Tribunal under the impugned award directed the appellant
transport corporation to pay 50% of the assessed compensation by fixing
50% composite negligence on the part of the driver of the bus owned by the
appellant transport corporation. The total compensation as assessed by the
Tribunal under the impugned award is as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
Sl.No. Heads Amount in Rs.
1. Medical expenses 3,45,150
2. Future medical expenses 1,30,000
3. Transportation 5,000
4. Extra nourishment 5,000
5. Mental agony 5,000
6. Pain and sufferings 40,000
7. Disability 40,000
Total 5,70,150
4. Two vehicle were involved in the accident, which resulted in the
first respondent/claimant sustaining the following injuries:
"1. Ecchymosis with Subconjunctual Haemorrhage right eye.
2. Abrasion 2x1 cm over the left thigh above the knee joint."
5. Nature of injuries sustained by the first respondent/claimant in the
accident which happened on 03.05.2004, has not been disputed by the
appellant transport corporation. The Tribunal has awarded a total
compensation of Rs.5,70,150/-. The Tribunal awarded a sum of
Rs.3,45,150/- towards medical expenses (supported by medical bills which
have been marked as exhibits before the Tribunal), Rs.1,30,000/- was
awarded towards future medical expenses, Rs.5,000/- was awarded towards
transport expenses, Rs.5,000/- was awarded towards extra nourishment,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
Rs.5,000/- was awarded towards mental agony, Rs.40,000/- was awarded
towards pain and sufferings and Rs.40,000/- was awarded towards disability.
6. This Court is of the considered view that considering the nature of
injuries sustained by the first respondent/claimant as referred to supra, the
total compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the first respondent/claimant
at Rs.5,70,150/- cannot be considered to be excessive. Hence, the second
contention raised by the appellant transport corporation that the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, is rejected by this Court.
7. In so far as the fixation of composite negligence on the part of the
driver of the bus owned by the appellant transport corporation and the driver
of the opposite vehicle insured with the fourth respondent/insurance
company in the ratio of 50 : 50 is concerned, is also a correct assessment
made by the Tribunal as it is a head on collusion between the two vehicles.
No contra evidence has been produced by the appellant transport corporation
before the Tribunal to disprove that their driver was equally responsible for
the cause of the accident. This Court does not find any infirmity in the
findings of the Tribunal as regards the negligence on the part of the driver of
the bus owned by the appellant transport corporation. Hence, the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
contention raised by the appellant transport corporation in this appeal is also
rejected.
8. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this appeal and
accordingly this appeal is dismissed. The appellant transport corporation is
directed to deposit the award amount along with interest and costs, less the
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.971 of
2004, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate
Court, Coimbatore. On such deposit of the compensation amount, the first
respondent/claimant, who is now a major, is permitted to withdraw the award
amount along with interest and costs, less the amount, if any, already
withdrawn by making necessary applications before the Tribunal. No costs.
08.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
kk
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Subordinate Court, Coimbatore.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
kk
C.M.A.No.3027 of 2009
08.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
