High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.S. JANARTHANA RAJA
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.
Versus
M. Marimuthu
C.M.A. No.2897 of 2007
Decided On : 19-11-2007
Transport Corporation - Motor Accident Claim - [Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166] - The court discussed the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation and the calculation of compensation. The key legal provisions discussed include the determination of liability under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the assessment of compensation for injuries.
Fact of the Case:
The claimant was injured in a motor traffic accident involving a bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. The Tribunal awarded compensation, which the Transport Corporation appealed against, disputing the liability and the amount of compensation awarded.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. It modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, reducing the amount and the interest rate.
Issues: The issues included determining the liability of the Transport Corporation for the accident and the assessment of just and fair compensation for the claimant's injuries.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. It also determined the appropriate compensation amount and interest rate based on the evidence presented.
Final Decision: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was disposed of with the modification of the compensation amount and interest rate, directing the Transport Corporation to deposit the revised amount for the claimant.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree dated 03.04.2006 made in MCOP No.110 of 2005 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Kallakurichi.
2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:-
The respondent/claimant was injured in the motor traffic accident on 19.05.2005. On 19.05.2005 at about 08.30 a.m., the claimant was standing near Emmappair Village Bus Stop at the left side of the Emmappair to Thenkeeranur Road. At that time, a bus bearing Registration No.TN-32-N-1517 belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and he was admitted in the Kallakurichi Govt. Hospital on the same day. Later he was shifted to Salem Government Hospital. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-before the Tribunal. The Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-
a) Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation or not?
b) Whether the Transport Corporation is liable to pay the compensation to the claimant?
After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal was of the view that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. Aggrieved by the award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant / Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. It is also submitted that the Tribunal had awarded excessive and exorbitant compensation, without basis and justification and that therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent / claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence available on record and came to the correct conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law.
5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 were marked. On the side of the Transport Corporation, one Balu was examined as R.W.1, who is the conductor of the bus and no documents were marked. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 is Dr.Shanmuga Sundaram. Ex.P1 is the certified xerox copy of F.I.R. Ex.P2 is the certified xerox copy of wound certificate. Ex.P3 is the certified xerox copy of the discharge book given by Salem Govt. Hospital. Ex.P4 is the certified xerox copy of M.V. Report. Ex.P5 is the xerox copy of section alteration report given by Police to Judicial Magistrate. Ex.P6 is the xerox copy of charge sheet given by S.I. of Police, Kallakurichi. Ex.P7 is the disability certificate issued by P.W.2. Ex.P8 is the X-ray. After considering the above materials and evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.1,25,000/-with 9% interest p.a. from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under:-
Rupees
Loss of income 1,02,000/-Pain and suffering 15,000/-
Nourishment 5,000/-
Transport expenses 3,000/-
Total... 1,25,000/-
===========
The claimant was 24 years old at the time of accident. In Ex.P2-wound certificate and Ex.P3-medical summary book, it is stated that the age of the claimant was 24 years at the time of accident. Also, in Ex.P7-Disability Certificate given by the Doctor, P.W.2, the age of the claimant is mentioned as 24 years. The nature of injuries are crush inj
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.