Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 11079 Mad
Judgement Date : 24 June, 2022
CMA.No.653 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
CMA.No.653 of 2022
&
CMP No.4633 of 2022
The Managing Director,
M/s. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
No.12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem 636 007 ...Appellant
vs.
Minor Ranjith kumar, S/o. Rajendran
(Minor rep[. by his N/F/Mother Manjula) ..Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the decree and judgment dated
20.09.2021 made in M.C.O.P. No.881 of 2017 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Namakkal and to
dismiss the above claim as against the appellant.
For Appellant : Mr.D. Venkatachalam
For Respondent : Respondent name printed
JUDGMENT
The Transport Corporation Limited is the appellant before this
Court challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P. No.881 of 2017 by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Namakkal. The appeal is both on the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.653 of 2022
ground of negligence as well as quantum.
2. The facts in brief which give raise to this appeal are as follows:
2.1. The claimant who is aged about 14 years has sustained
injuries in an accident on 06.06.2017 while he was riding a TVS XL
motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 28 BB 6965 on the
Mavureddipatti-Manickampalayam road. The bus belonging to the
appellant/respondent came and dashed against the vehicle in which the
claimant was travelling and caused injuries to him. The
respondent/claimant, therefore, claimed a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-
for the injuries sustained by him.
2.2 The Transport Corporation had filed its counter inter alia
contending that the vehicle was driven by a minor, who did not possess
license and that the minor was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent
manner, which resulted in the accident. Therefore, they had contended
that the minor is responsible for the accident.
2.3. The Tribunal below, on considering the evidence on record,
held the negligence on the part of the driver of the respondent bus and
had also fixed a contributory negligence of 10% on the minor and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.653 of 2022
awarded compensation. It is this award that is sought to be challenged.
3. Heard Mr. D. Venkatachalam, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant.
4. The records would show that the accident had occurred on
account of the rash driving by the appellant/respondent's driver. The FIR
and the evidence of P.W.1 would vouchsafe the above statement. The
Tribunal has also taken into account that the vehicle was driven by a
minor and therefore, has fixed a contributory negligence of 10% on the
minor. Therefore, the said finding and order cannot be faulted. Likewise
the quantum of award is reasonable and does not call for any interference.
Hence, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No Costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.06.2022
bga
Index : Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.653 of 2022
P.T.ASHA, J.
bga
To,
The Additional District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Namakkal.
CMA.No.653 of 2022 & CMP No.4633 of 2022
24.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!