[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Jayagopal on 19 January, 2026
C.M.A.No.3872 of 2025
and C.M.P.No.32565 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
C.M.A.No.3872 of 2025
and C.M.P.No.32565 of 2025
The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Bharathipuram, Dharmapuri
...Appellant
Vs.
Jayagopal ...Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, against the decree and judgment dated 21.06.2024 passed in
M.C.O.P.No.1342 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : Mr. Nitin D
JUDGMENT
This Appeal has been filed against the decree and judgment passed in
M.C.O.P.No.1342 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Additional Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri, dated 21.06.2024.
2. Briefly stated, the alleged accident took place on 15.10.2021 at about
19.50 hours at Singarapettai EB Office. The appellant was traveling as a pillion
on a two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN 24 AW 2182, its driver was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/01/2026 04:23:52 pm )
driving the two wheeler in a careful manner on the left side of the road. At that
time, on the same direction a TNSTC bus bearing Registration No.TN 57 N
1319, was driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two
wheeler and caused the accident. As a result, the appellant sustained grievous
injury and fractured his right tibia and right patella. The opposition to the claim
is that the alleged accident took place due to the negligent act of the claimant
who was not wearing a helmet at the time of accident and that he did not possess
a valid Driving License at the time of accident and that the driver of the TNSTC
bus drove the vehicle with caution. That apart, other facts have been disputed.
The claims Tribunal holds that, bus was being driven rashly and negligently and
caused the accident, is proved. Accordingly, the claim has been allowed and a
sum of Rs.3,52,525/- was awarded as compensation.
3. Through this appeal, findings of the Claims Tribunal has been
challenged. Substance of evidence clearly points out that the alleged accident
was caused due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the bus. The claims
Tribunal appreciated the evidence of PW1 and Ex.P.1 (copy of FIR) and
concluded that the driver of the bus caused the accident. The Tribunal has
analyzed and appreciated the evidence in correct perspectives. Hence, the above
findings of the Tribunal is confirmed.
4. Having come to the aforesaid conclusion, the next question to be
answered is about the compensation awarded to the claimant. The claimant was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/01/2026 04:23:52 pm )
37 years at the time of the accident. Considering the age and the nature of injury
suffered by the claimant and other facts such as year of accident, avocation etc.,
the claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,25,525/- as compensation and
the same found to be just and reasonable, which warrants any interference by
this Court.
5. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
19.01.2026
Index : Yes
Speaking Order : Yes
Neutral citation : Yes
vsn
To
1.The Additional Subordinate Court,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/01/2026 04:23:52 pm )
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J
vsn
19.01.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/01/2026 04:23:52 pm )
