The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the State Transport Corporation against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.10,000 compensation, holding the amount just and reasonable.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal dismissed confirming the Tribunal's award of Rs.10,000 compensation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 16.07.2013
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.KARUPPIAH
C.M.A.(MD)No.1377 of 2013
The Managing Director, M/s.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Bye Pass Road, Dindigul.
... Appellant/Respondent
vs. S.Chithiraisamy ... Respondent/Petitioner
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, [NDPS Court], Madurai, dated 13.03.2007 in M.C.O.P.No.1850 of 2002.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Prakash
JUDGMENT
Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.1850 of 2002, by order dated 13.03.2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, [NDPS Court], Madurai, the appellant Transport Corporation who is the respondent in the claim petition filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2.The respondent who is the claimant in the above said claim petition filed a claim petition for compensation of Rs.75,000/- and in the claim petition, it is stated that on 30.05.2001 at about 17.30 hours, the respondent/claimant was walking from east to west keeping extreme left side of the Madurai Dindigul Main Road. When he was nearing Samayanallur hostel, the respondent's driver drove the passenger bus bearing Regn.No.TN-57N-1094 from east to west in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the respondent/claimant from behind and thereby, the respondent was thrown down and sustained multiple injuries. Immediately, after the accident, he was taken to Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai and admitted in as an inpatient on 30.05.2001 and discharged on 01.06.2001. It is further stated that due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, the respondent could not continue his work as before the accident. Hence, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent/claimant, claimed a sum of Rs.75,000/- as compensation.
2
3.The appellant Transport Corporation/respondent in the claim petition filed a counter denying the manner of accident as stated in the claim petition. It is further denied the age, income and avocation of the deceased, nature of injuries and the disability sustained by him in the accident as stated in the claim petition.
4.Before the Tribunal on the side of the respondent/ claimant, the injured claimant has deposed as P.W.1 and marked 2 documents as Exs.P.1 and P.2. On the side of the appellant Transport Corporation/respondent in the claim petition, no oral and documentary evidence.
5.The trial Court has considered both the oral and documentary evidence adduced on the side of the respondent/claimant and held that the accident was occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant Transport Corporation.
6.With regard to the negligence aspect on the side of the respondent/claimant, he himself deposed and also marked Ex.P.1 copy of FIR and Ex.P.2, copy of discharge sheet, a perusal of the above said oral and documentary evidence reveal that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant Transport Corporation as rightly held by the Tribunal.
7.On consent of both the learned counsel for the appellant/respondent Transport Corporation and learned counsel for the respondent/claimant, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/as compensation.
8.In the memo grounds of appeal, it is not stated that the learned counsel for the appellant/respondent Transport Corporation has not given any consent before the Tribunal. Further, considering the age, injuries sustained by the petitioner and other factors, the above said award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. There is no need to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal.
9.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed by confirming the award passed by the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Deputy Registrar(Accounts)
/True Copy/
Assistant Registrar
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, NDPS Court, Madurai
+One cc to Mr.M.Prakash, Advocate, SR.No.35591 sms
RL/3 c- 23/10/2013
C.M.A.(MD)No.1377 of 2013 16.07.2013
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the underlying motor accident claim needs to be interfered with on the basis of age and injuries sustained.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Managing Director, M/s.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited
S.Chithiraisamy
R. Karuppiah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
