Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation vs Santhi on 27 March, 2025
C.M.A.(MD)No.635 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
C.M.A.(MD)No.635 of 2022
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Ltd., Karaikudi,
through its Branch Manager ... Appellant / Respondent
Vs.
1.Santhi
2.Minor. Dharshini ... Respondents / Claimants
(Minor 2nd respondent is rep. by her mother 1st respondent)
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the impugned award passed in
M.C.O.P.No.170 of 2019 dated 09.03.2021 on the file of the MACT (IVth
Additional District Court), Madurai.
For Appellant : Mr.P.M.Vishnu Varthanan
Respondents : Mr.Pethu Rajesh,
Legal aid counsel
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
C.M.A.(MD)No.635 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Challenging the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (IVth Additional District Court), Madurai in M.C.O.P.No.170 of
2019, dated 09.03.2021, the transport corporation filed this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal.
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as
per their ranking before the learned Tribunal.
3.The Transport Corporation / respondent is the appellant herein
and the claimants / petitioners are the respondents herein. On
18.10.2016 at about 12:45 hours, the husband of the first petitioner
namely, Koodaundi @ Koodalingam was travelling as a pillion rider in
the vehicle bearing registration No. TN-59-AW-2556. The same was
driven by one Joseph and while the vehicle was travelling from
Pandikovil to Madurai District Court from south to north direction, the
bus belonging to the respondent corporation bearing registration No.
TN-63-N-1742 which came in the opposite direction had hit on the two
wheeler, as a result of which, the said Koodaundi, who travelled as a
pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries and was taken to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, in an ambulance for
treatment. However, he passed away on the same day at about 1:45
hours.
4.A First Information Report in crime No.318 of 2016 was
registered under Sections 279, 337, 304(A) of IPC by the Traffic
Investigation Wing No.II Station against the driver of the Transport
Corporation. The deceased was 57 years old at the time of accident and
he was working as a storekeeper in Balmer Lawrie (UAE) Limited at
Dubai. Seeking to compensate for the death of the deceased Koodaundi
@ Koodalingam, his legal heirs have preferred the M.C.O.P before the
learned Tribunal.
5.The learned Tribunal had examined two witnesses and had
marked Exhibit P1 to P14 on the side of the petitioner and one witness
on the side of the respondent without marking any documents. On the
basis of the arguments made, evidence deposed and the documents
marked, the learned Tribunal had passed an award of Rs.12,65,000/-
(Rupees Twelve Lakhs and Sixty Five Thousand only) in favour of the
claimants. Challenging the same on the grounds of liability and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
quantum, the transport corporation has filed this Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal.
6.The learned counsel for the appellant Mr.P.M.Vishnu Varthanan
submitted that the accident had happened only due to the negligence of
the driver of the two wheeler. Had the driver of the two wheeler as well
as the pillion rider worn a helmet, the death of the pillion rider, that is,
Koodaundi would have been avoided. The learned Tribunal failed to fix
appropriate liability for non wearing of helmets. That apart, the driver of
the two wheeler did not possess valid driving license at the time of the
accident. However, 95% of liability had been fastened on the driver of
the Transport Corporation mechanically. Had the learned Tribunal
appropriately fastened liability on the driver of the two wheeler as well
as the pillion rider for not wearing helmet and for non possession of
valid driving license, the quantum of compensation would have been
less. Instead the learned Tribunal had proceeded to fix 5% liability on
the part of the pillion rider for not wearing the helmet. In view of the
same, he pressed for allowing the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
7.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
Mr.Pethu Rajesh submitted that the deceased was a pillion rider at the
time of the accident. In view of the same, he can be considered only as a
third party. The First Information Report in this regard was also
registered as against the driver of the bus belonging to the Transport
Corporation and the final report has also confirmed the same.
8.Heard the learned counsels on either sides and carefully
perused the materials available on record.
9.As far as the point of fastening the liability on the deceased
person for non wearing of helmet is concerned, the learned Tribunal
had relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in C.M.A.(MD)No.
596 of 2017 dated 30.08.2017 in the case of the Branch
manager, the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Madurai vs.
Jeyarani and others, in which only 5% negligence had been fixed on
the part of the deceased pillion rider for non wearing of helmet at the
time of the accident. Only following the dictum of the judgment passed
by this Court, the learned Tribunal had fixed 5% negligence on the
deceased pillion rider and fastened 95% of the negligence on the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
respondent corporation. On that basis, the learned Tribunal had
proceeded to pass an award of Rs.12,65,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs
and Sixty Five Thousand only) in which the transport corporation is
liable to pay only 95% of the award amount, that is, Rs,12,01,750/-
(Rupees Twelve Lakhs One Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty only).
Hence, I am not inclined to interfere with the award passed by the
learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous fails and the
same is dismissed.
11. The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit
the compensation amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal with
accrued interest and costs to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.170 of 2019 on
the file of the MACT (IVth Additional District Court), Madurai, within a
period of eight weeks (8) from the date of receipt of copy of this
judgment, less the amount, if any already deposited. On such deposit,
the claimants / respondents are entitled to get their shares as per the
apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, less the amount, if any already
withdrawn, by making necessary application before the Tribunal. The
1st claimant / 1st respondent is permitted to withdraw her share
together with interest and the share of the minor 2nd respondent shall
be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Banks till she attains
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
majority. The 1st claimant / 1st respondent who is the mother of the
minor claimant is permitted to withdraw the interest of minor once in
three months directly from the Bank, if necessary. No costs.
27.03.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
Sml
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
(IVth Additional District Court),
Madurai.
Copy to
The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.,
Sml
27.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 04:55:24 pm )
