The Managing Director vs Ranjitha
2022 Latest Caselaw 8741 Mad

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED: 26.04.2022

                                                    CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

                                           C.M.A(MD)No.502 of 2020


                     The Managing Director,
                     Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
                     Railway Station Road,
                     Kumbakonam                                              ... Appellant
                                                         vs.

                     1.Ranjitha

                     2.Minor Keerthanapriya

                     3.Minor.Bhavatharani
                      (Respondents 2 and rep by their mother and natural guardian 1st
                     respondent)

                     4.The Branch Manager,
                       Branch Office,
                       Karandhai Depot,
                       Thanjavur.                                       ... Respondents


                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor

                     Vehicle Act 1988, to set a side the impugned award passed in

                     M.C.O.P.No.188 of 2019 on the file of MACT (Special District Court),

                     Thanjavur dated 26.08.2019.


                     1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                        For Appellant           : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan
                                        For R1 to R3            : Mr.Tamilmani

                                                          JUDGMENT

************

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Transport

Corporation, challenging the Judgment and decree passed in

M.C.O.P.No.188 of 2019, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal (Special District Court), Thanjavur, dated 26.08.2019.

2. The brief case of the respondents 1 to 3/claimants, is as follows:

(i) The deceased was aged 29 years on the date of the accident and

was working as Mason and he was earning a sum of Rs.20,000/-.

(ii) On 03.08.2018, at about 2.30 pm., the deceased Sathish was

driving in Honda City Dawn bearing Registration No.TN-68-P-2539

along with one Karthi from Kovilthevarayanpettai in order to come to

his village in Thanjavur to Kumbakonam main road. While they were

coming near Ayyampettai, Koviladi Bus stop by keeping left side of the

road towards east to west direction with slow speed, the respondent

Corporation bus bearing Registration No.TN-63-N-1374 was driven by

its driver in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction and

dashed the deceased two wheeler. In this accident, both of them were

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis thrown away from the vehicle. Due to this accident, the deceased

sustained grievous head injuries and died on the spot. The accident was

taken place only due to rashness and negligent act of the respondent bus

driver. If the driver followed the traffic rules and was cautious, the

accident would have been averted. For the proof of rashness and

negligence act of the respondent bus driver, a criminal case was

registered against him in Ayyampettai Police Station in Crime No.196 of

2018 under Section 304(A) IPC which is also pending.

3. In the counter filed by the Transport Corporation, it is contended

that the motorcyclist came from the opposite direction in a rash and

negligent manner trying to overtake another vehicle. Immediately, the

second respondent driver sounded horn, switched the head lights of the

bus “On and Off'' and alerted the motorcyclist. In spite of it, the

motorcyclist proceeded in the same manner and dashed right side corner

of the second respondent bus and thereby, caused the accident.

4. According to the claimants, the rash and negligent driving of the

driver of the said bus was the cause of the accident and that since the said

bus belongs to the transport Corporation, the Transport Corporation is

liable to pay compensation of Rs.60,00,000/- to them.

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

5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the appellants/claimants, two

witnesses were examined as PW1 and P.W.2 and 9 documents were

marked as Exhibits P1 to P10. On behalf of the Transport Corporation,

one witness was marked as R.W.1 and no exhibit was marked. The

Tribunal based upon the oral and documentary evidence, came to the

conclusion that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent

driving of the driver of the transport Corporation Bus and awarded a sum

of Rs.14,98,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

Aggrieved over the same, the Transport Corporation has preferred this

appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. A perusal of records shows that the accident has taken place

only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Transport

Corporation bus and hence, the finding arrived at by the Tribunal does

not suffer from any irregularity or illegality and does not not warrant any

interference at this appellate stage.

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

8. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the

Tribunal based on the evidence available on record, has taken the

notional income of the deceased as Rs.7,500/- per month, the age of the

deceased as 28 years, adopted multiplier of 17, deducted 1/3rd towards

the personal expenses of the deceased and awarded a sum of

Rs.14,28,000/- towards 'future loss of income of the deceased'. The

compensation awarded under other heads are also just and reasonable.

Therefore, this Court feels that the award passed by the Tribunal needs

no interference. Hence, the plea taken by the Insurance Company stands

negatived.

9. On the point of negligence, I find that in view of clear and

cogent evidence of P.W.1, the finding rendered by the Tribunal that the

accident had taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the

bus belonging to the Transport Corporation/appellant is a well

considered and well merited and therefore, it does not warrant any

interference and hence, the same is hereby confirmed.

10. In the result,

(i) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

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

(ii) The orders passed by the Tribunal is upheld.

(iii) The appellant – Transport Corporation is directed to deposited

the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal i.e., Rs.14,98,000/- (Fourteen

Lakhs and Ninety Eight Thousand only) together with interest at the rate

of 7.5% per annum (if not already deposited) to the credit of

M.C.O.P.No.188 of 2019, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Special District Court, Thanjavur, within a period of eight

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(iv) On such deposit being made by the present appellant, the

claimants 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw the same, as per the orders

passed by the Tribunal, in the manner known to law. The apportionment

granted by the Tribunal shall be kept intact.

(v) The third claimant is minor and therefore, her share of

compensation amounts are ordered to be deposited in any one of the

nationalized bank, until they attain majority, and the first claimant is

permitted to withdraw the interest directly from the bank, once in three

months in order to maintain the minor.

26.04.2022

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No

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

1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Thanjavur

2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.

tta

JUDGMENT MADE IN C.M.A(MD)No.502 of 2020

26.04.2022

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