Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs A. Muniyamma on 7 September, 2021
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A. No. 1393 of 2014 and
M.P.No. 1 of 2014
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Villupuram) Limited,
No. 3/137, Salamedu, Vazhuthareddy,
Villupuram – 605 602.
Formerly known as Thanthai Periyar
Transport Corporation. ...Appellant
Vs
1. A. Muniyamma
2. Athimoolam ...Respondent
Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Decree and Judgement dated 12.09.2013
made in M.C.O.P.No.4432 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
Tribunal, II Small Causes Judge, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr. K.J. Sivakumar
For 1st Respondent :No such person
For 2nd Respondent :Died
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed challenging the impugned order dated
12.09.2013 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Small Causes
Court, Chennai) in M.C.O.P. No. 4432 of 2005.
2. The Tribunal, under the impugned order, has directed the
Appellant Transport Corporation to pay the respondents/claimants a
compensation of Rs.7,59,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand
only) for the death of Mr.Anbazhagan, who died in an accident that took place
on 26.07.2005 caused by a bus, owned by the appellant Transport Corporation.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
3. The Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.7,59,000/--
(Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand only), as detailed hereunder:-
Loss of Income
R.6,750 x 12 = Rs.81,000/-
(less 50% towards personal expenses)
Rs.40,500 x 18 .... Rs.7,29,000
Funeral Expenses .... Rs. 10,000
Loss of Love and Affection .... Rs. 20,000
___________
Total compensation .... Rs.7,59,000/-
___________
4. The appellant has challenged the impugned order, questioning the
liability and also the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
5. With regard to the first contention, the Tribunal has held that the
appellant Transport Corporation is liable to pay the compensation only based
on the materials and evidence available on record. Admittedly, the First
Information Report (Exhibit P1) has been registered only against the driver of
the bus, owned by the appellant Transport Corporation. Even though, the driver
of the bus, who had caused the accident, was examined as a witness (RW1),
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
his evidence cannot be accepted as he is not an independent witness. Apart
from the driver of the bus, no eye witness has been examined by the appellant
Transport Corporation before the Tribunal. Rough sketch Ex.P.2 has also been
filed by the police before the Tribunal which reveals that only the bus owned
by the appellant Transport Corporation was responsible for the cause of the
accident.
6. The Tribunal, only after considering the afore mentioned factors,
has rightly held that the driver of the bus owned by the appellant Transport
Corporation alone responsible for the cause of the accident, which resulted in
the death of Mr. Anbazhagan. This Court does not find any infirmity in the
findings of the Tribunal.
7. With regard to the second contention viz., the quantum of
compensation, this court also does not find any scope for interference for the
following reasons:-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
a) The accident happened on 26.07.2005. The deceased
Mr. Anbazhagan was aged 24 years at the time of accident and was a student
and also a part time Typist. The Tribunal has assessed the notional monthly
income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand Five Hundred
only) which cannot be considered to be excessive, as alleged by the appellant
Transport Corporation.
b) The Tribunal has rightly given due consideration to the year of the
accident before assessing the notional monthly income of the deceased.
c) The Tribunal has also rightly deducted 50% towards the personal
expenses of the deceased in accordance with the settled law as the deceased
was a bachelor at the time of the accident. The correct multiplier was also
adopted by the Tribunal in accordance with the settled law. Loss of future
prospects has rightly been awarded.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
8. This Court is of the considered view that the total compensation of
Rs.7,59,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand only) awarded by the
Tribunal cannot be considered to be excessive as the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal under various heads is just and reasonable, which needs no
interference.
9. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
hdismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed
10. The appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal, after deducting the amount
already deposited if any, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum
from the date of claim till the date of deposit and costs, to the credit of
MCOP.No.4432 of 2005 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
transfer the amount lying to the credit of MCOP.No.4432 of 2005 to the bank
account of the claimant through RTGS within a period of one week thereafter.
07.09.2021
Index:Yes/No
Speaking Order: Yes/No
sr/rgi
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2014
ABDUL QUDDHOSE.,J
sr/rgi
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
II Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras - 104.
C.M.A.No. 1393 of 2021
07.09.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
