Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Vijaya on 27 October, 2021
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
and CMP.No.16606 of 2021
The Managing Director,
APSRTC, Hyderabad. ...appellant
Vs.
1. Vijaya
2. Minor Somesh
3. Minor Sabithasree
4. Govindhan ...respondents
[respondents 2 and 3 are rep. by their
mother/natural guardian, the 1st petitioner herein]
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 24.09.2019
passed by the Special District Judge, Tiruvallur in MCOP.No.40 of 2019.
For Appellant : M/s.G.V.Shoba
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered V.SIVAGNANAM, J]
The appeal is heard through video conferencing.
2. This appeal arises out of the award dated 24.09.2019 passed by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I/Special District Judge, Tiruvallur in
MCOP.No.40 of 2019.
3. The respondents, who are the legal heirs of the deceased
Chandrababu, are the claimants before the Tribunal. It is the case of the
respondents/claimants that on 28.01.2015 at about 4.00 p.m., the deceased
was riding a motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-20-BA-8870 from
RMD College to Uthukottai. When he was nearing Perandur Rathinachetty
Old Rice Mill, an APSRTC Bus bearing Registration No.AP-29-Z-0778
came in the opposite direction, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed against the deceased motorcycle. Due to the impact, the
deceased died on the spot. Hence, the claimants laid a claim petition
claiming a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation.
4. The Transport Corporation resisted the claim petition by filing
counter statement, in which, it is stated that the deceased was responsible
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
for the accident, hence, the Transport Corporation is not liable to pay
compensation. They also disputed the age, income and occupation of the
deceased.
5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, the first claimant,
wife of the deceased, gave evidence as PW1 and examined 2 other
witnesses as PW2 and PW3 and Exs.P1 to P18 were marked. On the side of
the Transport Corporation, the driver of the Bus was examined as RW1, but
no document was marked.
6. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence produced by the
claimants, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the
rah and negligent driving of the driver of the Bus. By coming to such
conclusion, the the Tribunal passed an award for a compensation of
Rs.30,52,540/- along with interest at 7.5% per annum and directed the
appellant/Transport Corporation to pay the above compensation.
Questioning the award, the present appeal has been filed by the Transport
Corporation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
7. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the
appellant/Transport Corporation that while the deceased drove his
motorcycle in a high speed and tried to overtake a vehicle in front of him,
he lost control and dashed against the Bus, which came in the opposite
direction. Thus, the accident had occurred only due to the rash and
negligent driving of the deceased, hence, it would not be proper on the part
of the Tribunal in fixing the entire negligence on the part of the driver of the
Bus. He further added that the monthly income of the deceased taken by
the Tribunal while calculating the compensation, is on the higher side and it
has not followed the legal precedents laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
while arriving at the quantum of compensation.
8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport
Corporation and perused the materials available on record.
9. The claimants, in order to prove their case, examined one Palanivel
Rajan PW2, who clearly deposed that the accident had occurred due to the
rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Bus. The Police registered
Ex.P1 FIR against the driver of the bus and after investigation, Ex.P2
charge sheet was also filed against him. Hence, this Court is of the view that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.4/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that only the driver of the
Bus was responsible for the accident and therefore, the appellant/Transport
Corporation is liable to pay the compensation.
10. With regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the claimants examined one Jayakumar PW3, who is working as
Assistant Professor in RMD Engineering College, and he deposed that the
deceased was working as a Van Driver in the College and earning
Rs.12,340/- per month and to prove his contention, he marked Ex.16
Appointment Order and Ex.P17 attested copy of pay slip. The Tribunal by
relying upon the above documents, taken Rs.12,340/- as monthly income of
the deceased and added 50% of the same towards future prospects and
arrived at Rs.18,510/- [12,340 + 6,170] towards loss of monthly income.
Since the number of dependents of the deceased is 4, 1/4th of the income
was deducted towards his personal expenses and thus the loss of
dependency was arrived at Rs.13,885/- (rounded off) [18,510 – 4,627].
Then, by applying multiplier 17, the loss of annual income of the deceased
was arrived at Rs.28,32,540/- [13,885 x 12 x 17]. In addition to that, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards Loss of Consortium to the
first claimant/wife of the deceased; Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
Rs.15,000/- towards Loss of Estate; Rs.1,50,000/- towards Loss of Love
and Affection to the claimants 2 to 4 by awarding each of them Rs.50,000/-.
In total, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.30,52,540/- as compensation
along with interest at 7.5% from the date of claim petition till the date of
deposit. In our considered view, the award of the Tribunal is fair and
reasonable, which does not warrant interference by this Court. In fine, the
award is confirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
11. In such view of the matter, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is dismissed as devoid of merits. The appellant/Transport Corporation is
directed to deposit the entire 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 deposit, the
claimants 1 and 4 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares as
apportioned by the Tribunal, less, the amount already withdrawn, if any,
together with proportionate interest and costs. Insofar as the minor
claimants 2 & 3 are concerned, their respective shares 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,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.6/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
once in three months. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
27.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
pvs
To
1. The Special District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Tiruvallur
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/8
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
pvs
C.M.A. No.2890 of 2021
27.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.8/8
