Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8245 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 July, 2023
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 13.07.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.6581 of 2022
The Managing Director,
The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Ltd)
Bye Pass Road, Madurai 625 010.
Branch Address:
CTC Dippo, CTC Kankeyam,
Cross Road, Tiruppur. ...Appellant
Vs.
1.C.Avinasiappan
2.A.Yuvaraj
3.A.Thilagavathi ...Respondents
PRAYER : The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 20.11.2019 in
M.C.O.P.No.879 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special District Judge, Tiruppur.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Ramar for
Mr.Sudalaiyandi
For Respondents : Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel for R1 & R2
No appearance for R3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the
appellant/Transport Corporation challenging the award dated 20.11.2019 in
M.C.O.P.No.879 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special District Judge, Tiruppur.
2.The respondents herein filed the claim petition claiming a sum of
Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Rajamani, who died in the
accident that took place on 26.12.2017. According to the respondents, on the
date of accident i.e., on 26.12.2017 at 5.15 a.m., while the deceased was
walking on the Dharapuram to Tirupur main road, from North to South
direction, a bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation, which
came on the same direction, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner
and without observing the traffic rules and regulations, dashed against the
deceased and caused the accident. In the accident, the deceased Rajamani
sustained fatal injuries and inspite of treatment, died in the hospital. Hence,
they were entitled to a claim of Rs.30,00,000/-.
3. The appellant/Transport Corporation filed a counter statement denying
the averments made by the respondents and contended that the driver of the bus https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
was not responsible for the accident. The accident occurred due to negligence
of the deceased and hence, the deceased is solely responsible for the accident.
Therefore, the appellant was not liable to pay any compensation to the
respondents. The appellant had also denied the age, avocation and income of
the deceased. In any event, the compensation claimed by the respondents is
excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
4.Before the Tribunal, the respondents examined three witnesses and
marked four documents as Exs.P1 to P4. The appellant/Transport Corporation
examined Tamilarasan, the driver of the bus as R.W.1 and did not let in any
documentary evidence.
5. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and
directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.15,40,000/- as compensation to the
respondents.
6.Against the said award dated 20.11.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.879 of
2018 granting compensation to the respondents, the appellant/Transport
Corporation has come out with the present appeal. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
7.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the finding of the
Tribunal on negligence as well as quantum is erroneous. It is the case of the
appellant that the deceased contributed to the accident as he was sitting on the
main road. The driver of the bus was blinded, since the lorry which came on the
opposite direction had bright head lights and it was also misty at the relevant
point of time. In view of the negligence on the part of the deceased, the
Tribunal ought to have fixed contributory negligence. The learned counsel
further submitted that the notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,500/- per
month fixed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. The respondents have not
filed any proof to establish the income of the deceased and in the absence of the
same, Tribunal ought not to have fixed notional income, which is on the higher
side.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the
respondents examined two witnesses to show that the deceased and another
person were walking on the road and the version of the appellant that they were
sitting on the road cannot be believed. The Tribunal had disbelieved the
evidence of R.W.1, who had stated that the deceased was sitting on the road.
The Tribunal has rightly held that the driver of the bus belonging to the
appellant was guilty of negligence. The learned counsel further submitted that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
since the accident is of the year 2017, the Tribunal had correctly fixed the
notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,500/- per month. Hence, there is no
reason to interfere with the award of the Tribunal.
9.This Court on perusal of the documents and materials on record finds
that the respondents have examined two witnesses to establish that the deceased
was walking on the road and their evidence is cogent and there is no reason to
disbelieve their evidence. R.W.1's evidence which is to the contrary does not
inspire confidence. The Tribunal rightly disbelieved his evidence. Therefore,
this Court holds that the accident had taken place only due to the negligent
driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant.
10.As regards quantum, this Court finds that the notional income fixed
by the Tribunal at Rs.10,500/- is just and reasonable. The accident took place in
the year 2017. It is a matter of common knowledge that even a daily wage
labourer would have earned that amount during the said period. Therefore, this
Court finds that the award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and
there is no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the
sum of Rs.15,40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the
respondents along with interest and costs is confirmed. The appellant/
Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award amount along with
interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such
deposit, the respondents are permitted to withdraw their respective share of the
award amount, on the basis of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along with
proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
13.07.2023 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No vkr
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Special District Judge, Tiruppur.
2.The Section Officer VR Section, High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
vkr
C.M.A.No.889 of 2022
13.07.2023
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!