Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs P.Shanmugam on 30 January, 2025
C.M.A.(MD) No.1100 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI
C.M.A.(MD)No.1100 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.11528 of 2024
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Karaikudi Region), Kumbakonam Ltd,
Nesawalar Colony, Sivaganga, SH-29, Karaikudi.
... Appellant/Respondent
vs.
1.P.Shanmugam
2.S.Prakash
3.S.Elamathi
4.M.Sumathi
5.Minor S.Santhosh
(Represented by his father/first respondent)
... Respondents/Petitioners
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1983, against judgment and decree dated
30.06.2023 passed in M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2021 on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Karur.
For appellant : Mr.K.A.Thirumalaiappan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Sakthivel
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 8
C.M.A.(MD) No.1100 of 2024
*****
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation against the award dated
30.06.2023 made in M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2021 by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Karur.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the
appellant and the respondents and perused relevant records.
3. This appeal focuses on the liability issue and on quantum.
4. Upon consideration, the Tribunal fixed the income of the
deceased at Rs.12,000/- p.m. By adding 40% towards future
prospects and by deducting 50% of the income towards personal
and living expenses, loss of dependency was arrived at Rs.
18,14,400/-. Towards loss of consortium, an amount of Rs.
2,00,000/- was granted. For loss of estate and for funeral
expenses, an amount of Rs.15,000/- under each head was granted.
For transport expenses, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted. In
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
all, an amount of Rs.20,54,400/- was granted as compensation.
5. It has come on record through the evidence of P.W.2
(Ocular witness) that on 20.12.2020 at about 6.00 p.m., when he
was standing on the northern side of the Karur-Trichy road (East-
west road), on the southern side, Sathish S/o.Shanmugam was
standing along with his two wheeler bearing registration No.TN-47-
Y-2736 and a bus bearing registration No.TN-63-N-1786, which
came from east to western direction came in a rash and negligent
manner, hit on the said Sathish, who was standing on the extreme
left side of the road. Due to the said impact, he was thrown away
and he succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the
above said bus. During his cross examination, he would state that
he was present, when the deceased was sent to the hospital in an
ambulance. When a suggestion was posed to him that the
deceased was proceeding in a wrong route opposite to the bus, he
has answered in negative. He has reiterated that the accident
occurred on the mud portion of the road.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Whereas, on the respondent side, the driver of the bus has
been examined as R.W.1 (Dhayala Rajan). It is his evidence that
on 20.12.2020, while he was proceeding from Karaikudi to
Coimbatore in the bus bearing registration No.TN-63-N-1786, at
about 6.20 p.m., when he was reaching Andipalayam, a person
came in a wrong direction without helmet and without following
traffic rules and hit on the front left side of the bumper. Upon his
complaint, a case has been registered against the rider of the two
wheeler. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased
only, the accident happened.
7. In consideration of the evidence of P.W.2 and R.W.
1/Ocular witnesses, the Tribunal concluded that the accident
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the
appellant/Corporation and held that for non-wearing of helmet by
the deceased, contributory negligence at 10% was fixed on the part
of the deceased and the respondent/Transport Corporation was
made liable to pay 90% of the compensation amount. I do not find
any good reason to reverse the findings of the Tribunal.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. As regards the monthly income, it is the evidence of P.W.
1/father that the deceased was working as a service man in V.M.
Service Station and was earning a sum of Rs.350/- per day. No
document was marked to substantiate the said details. As per
Ex.P3/Post Mortem Certificate, his age is fixed as 20 years. The
Tribunal has fixed the notional income at Rs.12,000/-. By adding
40% for future prospects and taking multiplier as 18, the loss of
dependency was arrived at Rs.18,14,400/- by the Tribunal cannot
be found fault with. Hence, it needs no interference and the award
of the Tribunal is confirmed.
9. In the result,
(i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(ii) The compensation of Rs.18,48,960/- awarded by the
Tribunal is confirmed.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(iii) The appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit
the reduced compensation amount of Rs.18,48,960/- (less the
amount already deposited if any) with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation to the
credit of M.C.O.P.No.243 of 2021 on the file of Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Karur, within a period of
eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
(iv) On such deposit being made, the claimants/respondents
1 to 4 are permitted to withdraw their share amount as per
apportionment made by the Tribunal with interest, after adjusting
the amount, if any already withdrawn by filing necessary application
before the Tribunal.
(v) The Tribunal is directed to deposit the share amount of the
minor claimant/fifth respondent in any one of the Nationalized Bank
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/first respondent, who is his father, is
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
permitted to withdraw interest from the said deposit, once in three
months and utilise the same for the welfare of the minor
claimant/fifth respondent.
30.01.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
apd
To
1.The Additional District Judge,
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court,
Karur.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.KALAIMATHI,J
apd
Pre-delivery order made in
30.01.2025
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
