The Managing Director vs Minor Logeswari
2023 Latest Caselaw 4014 Mad

                                                                             C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
                                               DATED: 10.04.2023
                                                    CORAM
                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
                                           C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023
                                                     and
                                           C.M.P.(MD).No.4215 of 2023

                The Managing Director,
                State Express Transport Corporation Limited,
                Pallavan Salai,
                Chennai                                                              ... Appellant

                                                      Vs.
                 Muthunayagi (died)
                1.Minor Logeswari
                 Nagu (died)

                2.Mariyammal
                3.Gomathi
                4.Vasuki
                (The respondents 2 to 4 are not necessary parties
                and that they are given up)
                                                                                  ... Respondents


                PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the
                Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award made in M.C.O.P.No.544 of 2014,
                dated 02.06.2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special
                District Court, Madurai.


                                    For Appellant           : Mr.P.Prabhakaran




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                1/6
                                                                                    C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023




                                                    JUDGMENT

Challenging the liability fixed on the driver of the Transport Corporation

bus by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special District Court), Madurai in

M.C.O.P.No.544 of 2014, dated 02.06.2022, the appellant/Transport

Corporation has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport Corporation

would fairly submit that the quantum fixed by the Tribunal is reasonable.

However, the entire liability has been fixed on the driver of the Transport

Corporation bus. Therefore, he sought interference of this Court.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal is as follows:

The deceased was a Contractor (Mason) by profession and on

08.09.2013, he travelling along with four other persons in a Mini Van bearing

Reg.No.TN-59-BZ-9155 from North to South and while they tried to enter into

the service road, the Transport Corporation bus bearing Reg.No.TN-01-N7555

coming behind in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Mini

Van. As a result, the deceased succumbed to injuries.

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

C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023

4. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were

examined and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked, on the side of the respondent R.W.1

was examined and no document was marked on the side of the respondent.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the oral evidence on the side of the

claimants as well as the respondent, came to the conclusion that only the driver

of the Transport Corporation bus was rash and negligent in driving the bus. It is

relevant to note that the bus was coming behind the Mini Van and there must be

some reasonable distance will be maintained by the driver of the bus. When the

Mini Van trying to enter into the service road, the bus coming behind and

dashed against the Mini Van. That itself clearly indicates that the driver of the

bus has not maintained a reasonable distance with the Mini Van, which resulted

in the accident. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the

appellant that the negligence is also on the part of the Mini Van cannot be

countenanced.

6. In such a view of the a matter, the finding of the Tribunal that the

driver of the Transport Corporation bus was negligent in driving the bus, which

does not require any interference by this Court. The quantum of compensation

awarded by the Tribunal has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the

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

C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023

appellant and the only challenge is to the liability fixed on the Transport

Corporation bus.

7. As discussed above, if a reasonable distance is maintained by the

driver of the Transport Corporation bus, the accident would not have happened.

Hence, the award passed by the Tribunal does not require any interference.

8. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special District Court),

Madurai in M.C.O.P.No.544 of 2014, dated 02.06.2022 is confirmed.

9. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, the appellant/Transport

Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest

and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this order, if not deposited already. On such compliance, the claimants are

permitted to withdraw their share as apportioned by the Tribunal. No costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

10.04.2023 akv

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

C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023

To

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Madurai.

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

C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.

akv

C.M.A.(MD).No.338 of 2023

10.04.2023

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