Madras High Court
State Express Transport Corporation ... vs Maria Pooranam on 24 November, 2023
C.M.A.(MD).No.940 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
CMA(MD) No.940 of 2022 and
CMP(MD) No.9339 of 2022
State Express Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai through its Managing Director
having office at Thiruvalluvar House
Pallavansalai, Chennai 600 002. ...appellant/
respondent No.1
Vs.
1.Maria Pooranam
2.Eritto Baburaj
3.Ajay Ranjith Singh
4.Merlin Sinduja
5.R.Devaraj
6.Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd.,
through its Branch Manager
Salem, Office at 8/111
Mangalam Building, 4 roads,
Salem 636 009. ... Respondents/
claimants
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD).No.940 of 2022
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the fair and decreetal order dated
23.01.2021 in MCOP No.1532 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli.
For Appellant : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Balakrishnan for R1 to R6
Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan for R7
JUDGMENT
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the award
and decree dated 23.01.2021 made in MCOP No.1532 of 2015 by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli.
2.The legal heirs of the deceased Anthony Xavier filed MCOP
No.1532/2015 before the Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli, seeking
compensation for the pecuniary loss sustained by the
claimants/petitioners in a road transport accident.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. Before the tribunal, the respondents 1 and 3 have filed
counter statements. During trial, the claimant/petitioner No.1 examined
herself as P.W.1 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P7. The occurrence witness,
viz., Moses was examined as P.W.-2. On the side of the respondents, the
driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1 and R.W.2 was also examined.
Copy of the claim petitions in MCOP Nos.1964/2013 and 86/2014 were
also marked during the cross-examination of R.W.1. Certified Lok Adalat
award copy was marked as Ex.R5. Based upon the oral and documentary
evidence, the tribunal has held that the accident had taken place due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the transport corporation
and also awarded a compensation of Rs.37,48,324/- with interest at 7.5%
from the date of petition till the date of realization. Aggrieved by the
same, the transport corporation is before this Court with this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that on the
point of negligence, ie., in the nature of contributory negligence, the
appeal has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the
learned counsel for the respondents/claimants 1 to 4 and the learned
counsel for the respondent insurance company/R6 and perused the
materials available on record.
6.With regard to the plea raised by the appellant, we have
perused the oral evidence of P.W.2, viz., the occurrence witness and also
Ex.P1-FIR and Ex.P5-charge sheet. It remains to be stated that R.W.1 is
the driver of the transport corporation bus. During the cross-examination
of R.W.1, he has categorically admitted that after enquiry, he was placed
under suspension, which has also resulted in stoppage of income. In the
connected MCOP Nos.1964/2013 and 86/2014, the tribunal has held that
the driver of the transport corporation was at fault and accordingly, fixed
the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and the
transport corporation have also settled the amount during the Lok Adalat,
as could be seen from the judgment in respect of the cases marked before
the tribunal, namely, Ex.R2,R3, R4 and R5. On appreciation of the oral
and documentary evidence, we find that the evidence adduced by P.W.2 –
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
occurrence witness duly corroborated the documentary evidence of
Ex.P5.
7.It is to be stated that as per the charge sheet, it is categorically
admitted that while the driver of the tipper lorry drove the lorry on the
bye-pass fly-over, the tyre punctured and hence, he parked the vehicle on
the left hand side of the road and the cleaner of the lorry was doing
puncturing work and at the time, the bus driven by the transport
corporation came and dashed against the lorry. So also the evidence of
P.W.2. Taking into consideration the admission made by the driver of the
offending bus, R.W.1, in the connected matters, a finding was also
rendered by the competent tribunal with regard to negligence on the part
of the driver, which was not appealed by the transport corporation
coupled with the evidence of P.W.3, which clearly indicates negligence
on the part of the driver, we find that the finding rendered by the tribunal
need not be interfered with. Accordingly the finding given by the tribunal
with regard to negligence on the part of the driver of the bus is hereby
confirmed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, in
2018 (1) TN MAC 592 (DB), [Managing Director, State Express
Transport Corporation Limited, Vs. Radha and others], the Division
Bench has held that though the appeal has been preferred by the
Transport Corporation, considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Court could take suo motu decision for enhancing the
compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal, by re-appreciating the
evidence on record and applying the correct position of law, as on date
and by invoking Order 41, Rule 33 C.P.C. and Section 151 CPC as well
as Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
9. By relying upon the aforesaid decision, though this Appeal has
been preferred by the Transport Corporation, on considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, we find that with regard to loss of love and
affection for the children, namely, the respondents/claimants 2 to 4, no
award has been passed and hence, by invoking the suo motu powers, if
compensation is awarded towards loss of love and affection, it would
meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.40,000/- is fixed
to each claimants/respondents 2 to 4, who are the children of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
deceased. Accordingly, the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- is awarded on the
head of loss of love and affection.
10. In fine, the award of the tribunal is partly modified and
enhanced from Rs.37,48,324/- to Rs.38,68,324/-. However, as far as the
other heads, the amount awarded remains unaltered.
11. Accordingly, the award amount granted by the tribunal is
enhanced as follows:
Heads Awarded by the Modified/ Final
tribunal (Rs.) reduced Compensation
(Rs.)
Loss of income, 37,48,324/- (confirmed) 37,48,324/-
future prospects,
1/4th deduction,
multiplier 13, loss
of consortium to
the first claimant,
loss of estate and
funeral expenses
Loss of love and - 40,000 x 3 1,20,000/-
affection (awarded)
Total 37,48,324/- Enhanced 38,68,324/-
12. The compensation is enhanced from Rs.37,48,324/- to
Rs.38,68,324/-. The respondents 1 to 4 are entitled for the compensation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
of Rs.38,68,324/- (Rupees thirty eight lakhs sixty eight thousand three
hundred and twenty four only) with interest at 7.5% from the date of
petition till the date of realization.
13. The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit
the entire award amount along with interest within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such
deposit being made, the claimants/respondents, namely, the respondents 1
to 4 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares with proportionate
interest and costs as apportioned by the Tribunal. The appellant Transport
Corporation and the respondents/claimants 1 to 4 are liable to pay
Court fee for the enhanced compensation awarded.
14. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in
part with the above modifications. No costs. Consequently connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(T.K.R.,J.) (P.B.B.,J.)
24.11.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
RR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J.
AND
P.B.BALAJI, J.
RR
24.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
