Dismissed

The Managing Director ` v. S.Velu

Madras HC8 Oct 2014CMA/2669/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award. The Court upheld the Tribunal's finding of liability and directed the appellant to deposit the awarded compensation amount.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to deposit the entire compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal within one month.

The Managing Director ` Vs S.Velu — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 08.10.2014

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶5

C.M.A. No. 2669 of 2014 & M.P. No. 1 of 2014

¶6

Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation,
Coimbatore Division – II,
37, Mettupalayam Road,
Coimbatore. ..Appellant/Respondent
Vs.
1. S. Velu
2. Kaleeswari ..Respondents/Petitioners
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed U/s. 173 of Motor Vehicles
Act.1988 as against the Award and decree dated 28.04.2011 passed in
M.C.O.P. NO. 536 of 2009 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal and Fast Track Court No. IV, Coimbatore at Tirupur.
For Appellant :: Ms.R.T. Sundari
For Respondents:: Mr.Ma.P. Thangavel
J U D G M E N T

¶7

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed as against the judgment and decree dated 28.04.2011 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 536 of 2009 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Fast Track Court No. IV, Coimbatore at Tiruppur.

¶8

The parents of one Kumar, who met with an accident on 03.05.2009 and died due to the injuries sustained, filed the claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The said Kumar was a student of Government School, Angeripalayam, Tiruppur. The Appellant Transport Corporation, opposed the claim petition on the ground that there was carelessness on the part of the rider of the two-wheeler, which was involved in the accident and they also refused to accept that the deceased was a student. It was further stated that the claim for compensation, which was restricted to Rs.5 lakhs was, in any event, excessive and

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

that the liability may be fastened upon the rider of TVS 50. Analysing the documentary and oral evidence, more particularly, the evidence of the eye-witnesses, the Tribunal, by award dated 28.04.2011, allowed the claim petition filed in M.C.O.P. No. 536 of 2009 in part and directed the Transport Corporation to pay compensation of Rs. 3.85 lakhs with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. The amount was directed to be deposited in a Nationalised Bank and the claimants before the Tribunal were directed to pay the deficit court-fee of Rs. 3222.50p within 15 days. Challenging the said award, the Transport Corporation has come forward with the above appeal.

¶11

Before the Tribunal, one Saravanan, who was examined as an eye-witness, stated that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Transport Corporation bus. He further deposed that based on the complaint of the rider of the two-wheeler, in which the deceased travelled as a pillion rider, a case in Crime No. 1566 of 2009 was registered in Thiruppur North Police Station. The driver of the appellant Corporation was also examined as R.W.1. However, the Tribunal did not accept his evidence as the same was not corroborated. The finding of the Tribunal is based on the finding of fact and the Tribunal awarded the compensation taking note of the decisions reported in 2009 ACJ 856 (Aparna Das and Others V. National Insurance Company and Another) and 2010 (1) TN MAC 195 (M. Gunasundari V. Brills Transport and Others).

¶12

I find that there is no need to interfere with the judgment and decree of the Tribunal rendered in M.C.O.P. No. 536 of 2009 and hence, the appeal filed by the Transport Corporation stands dismissed. The appellant Corporation is directed to deposit the entire amount as ordered by the Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such deposit being made, the claimants/respondents herein are entitled to withdraw the same by filing appropriate petition. No costs. Connected M.P. is closed.

¶13

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

¶16

The Additional District Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Fast Track Court No. IV, Coimbatore at Tirupur.

¶17

1 cc to Mr.Ms. R.T. Sundari, Advocate SR.47762 + 1 cc to Mr.Ma.P. Thangavel, Advcoate sR.47850

¶18

C.M.A. No. 2669 of 2014
RBD(CO)
Eu 11.11.14

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The Managing Director ` v. S.Velu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Managing Director ` v. S.Velu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs S.Thangavel

The Management of Tamil Nadu Vs the Presiding Officer

S.Venugopal, Vs The Revenue Divisional officer

The National Insurance Vs Lubna Saida (Minor)

The Unite India Insuurnace Vs Arun S/O.Shyan Goundenpalayam

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Chakkarapani