Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation ... vs Ranjitha on 3 October, 2024
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Salaibajar,
Ramanathapuram,
Represented by its Divisional Manager. ... Appellant
Vs.
Ranjitha. ... Respondent in C.M.A.(MD)No.508/2020
Muniyasamy ... Respondent in C.M.A.(MD)No.509/2020
Pushpam ... Respondent in C.M.A.(MD)No.510/2020
Chellappa ... Respondent in C.M.A.(MD)No.511/2020
Minor.Mahalakshmi
through her father and next guardian
Chellappa. ... Respondent in C.M.A.(MD)No.512/2020
Prayer in all C.M.As: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, to set aside the impugned award dated
19.12.2019 passed in M.C.O.P.No.361 to 365 of 2016, respectively, on
the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court,
Tirunelveli.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
For Appellant in all C.M.As : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan
For Respondents in all C.M.As : Mr.V.Sasikumar
*****
COMMON JUDGMENT
The instant appeals have been filed challenging the common award
passed in the claim petitions filed by the injured respondents in all the
appeals. The respondents in all the appeals filed separate claim petitions
stating that while they were travelling in a car from east to west
observing traffic rules, a bus belonging to the appellant came in the
opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and caused a head-on
collision, as a result of which the claimants suffered serious injuries.
2. The appellant filed a counter stating that the accident took place
only due to the negligence of the car driver and therefore, the appellant is
not liable to pay any compensation.
3. It is to be noted here that though the injured claimants were
travelling in a car, they had erroneously stated that they were travelling
in a bike. However, the Tribunal had held, on the basis of the evidence,
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
that the claimants had travelled together in a Tata Indigo car.
4. The claimants examined nine witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.9 and
marked Exs.P1 to P42. The appellant examined the bus driver as R.W.1
and did not mark any documents. The Disability Certificate of the
claimant in C.M.A.(MD)No.508 of 2020 was marked as Ex.C1.
5. The Tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and
documentary evidence, held that the accident took place only due to the
negligence of the bus driver and directed the appellant to pay the
compensation to the respondents in all the appeals.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the finding
on negligence is not justified, when the evidence on record would show
that the accident took place only due to the negligence of the driver of
the car, who is the claimant in C.M.A.(MD)No.509 of 2020.
7. The learned counsel further submitted that the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and prayed for
reduction of compensation.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
8. The learned counsel for the respondents in all C.M.As, per
contra, submitted that the claimants, who are all eyewitnesses, had
examined themselves as P.W.1 to P.W.4; that FIR would suggest that the
accident took place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus
driver; that the Final Report filed by the Police against the bus driver
would also show that the bus driver is guilty of negligence; and that the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable
and therefore, the appeals are liable to be dismissed.
9. The points for consideration in the instant appeals are as
follows:
‘a. Whether the finding on negligence is justified?
b. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is just and reasonable?’
10. As regards the first question, it is seen that the claimants had
examined themselves before the Tribunal and they had deposed that the
accident took place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus
driver. The appellant had examined its driver as R.W.1. R.W.1 had
admitted in his cross-examination that FIR was registered against him
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
and a criminal case is pending against him for rash and negligent driving
before the Judicial Magistrate, Muthugulathur. In the light of the
evidence adduced on the side of the claimants, which is corroborated by
the Final Report of the Police before the Criminal Court, this Court is of
the view that the evidence of RW1 does not inspire confidence.
Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal that the accident took place only
due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver cannot be faulted.
11. As regards the compensation, the only infirmity according to
the learned counsel for the appellant is that the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.
361 of 2016, which culminated in C.M.A.(MD)No.508 of 2020, had not
established the functional disability and therefore, the Tribunal ought not
to have adopted the multiplier method by fixing the notional income at
Rs.7,500/- p.m. This Court finds that Ex.P37-Disability Certificate would
show that the claimant had lost her vision in the left eye and had suffered
facial asymmetry. The claimant had also established that she was
working as a flower vendor. The Tribunal had taken into consideration
the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Raj Kumar vs. Ajay
Kumar reported in 2011 (1) SCC page 343 and held that the claimant
had suffered functional disability. In the light of the evidence on record
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
and the disability suffered by the said claimant, this Court is of the view
that the finding of the Tribunal cannot be faulted.
12. The learned counsel for the appellant is unable to point out any
infirmity in the award of compensation to any other claimants. Further,
this Court finds that the compensation awarded to the claimants is just
and reasonable and no interference is called for. Thus, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal in all the claim petitions is confirmed as
follows:
Sl. Appeal No. Amount awarded by the
No Tribunal
(M.C.O.P.No.361 of 2016)
(M.C.O.P.No.362 of 2016)
(M.C.O.P.No.363 of 2016)
(M.C.O.P.No.364 of 2016)
(M.C.O.P.No.365 of 2016)
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
13. The appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal as mentioned above, together
with interest at 7.5% p.a. and proportionate costs, less the amount
already deposited, if any, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order.
14. On such deposit, the respondents in C.M.A.(MD)Nos.508 to
511 of 2020 (M.C.O.P.Nos.361 to 364 of 2016) are permitted to
withdraw their award amount with interest and costs, less the amount
already withdrawn, if any, by filing appropriate application before the
Tribunal.
15. The Tribunal is directed to deposit the share amount of the
minor claimant in C.M.A.(MD)No.512 of 2020 (M.C.O.P.No.365 of
2016) in any one of the Nationalized Banks in an interest bearing Fixed
Deposit, initially for a period of three years, renewable thereafter, till the
minor attains majority. The guardian of the minor claimant/claimant in
C.M.A.(MD)No.511 of 2020, who is her father, is permitted to withdraw
interest from the said deposit, once in three months and utilise the same
for the welfare of the minor claimant in C.M.A.(MD)No.512 of 2020.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
16. In the result, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are dismissed.
No costs.
03.10.2024
Index: Yes/ No
NCC: Yes / No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
apd
To:
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli.
2.The Record Keeper,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
apd
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.508 to 512 of 2020
03.10.2024
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
