The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for a preponderance of probability in determining negligence in motor accident claims cases, and the impact of delay in lodging FIR on the claim.

S. Manikumar, J.

Being aggrieved by the award made in M.C.O.P.No.223 of 2012, dated 02.08.2016, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (1st Additional District and Sessions Judge), Vellore, the present appeal has been filed.

2. On 28.02.2012, about 9.30 P.M., when the deceased, husband of the 1st respondent/claimant, was riding his Motorcycle, bearing Registration No. TN 25 X 5332, on the extreme left side of Chetpet to Vadavasi Road, near Chetpet Marketing Committee, followed by the 2nd respondent/claimant, son of the deceased, a bus, bearing Registration No. TN 25 N 0183, owned by the appellant-Transport Corporation, driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcyclist. He sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. A case in Cr.No.338 of 2012, has been registered against the driver of the bus, for the offences, under Sections 279 and 304(A) IPC., on the file of Chetpet Police Station.

3. According to the legal representatives, the deceased was the sole breadwinner, working as an Assistant Quality Inspector, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Tindivanam and earned Rs.20,000/- per month. For the death of the motorcyclist, legal representatives have claimed compensation of Rs.36,00,000/-, under various heads.

4. The appellant-Transport Corporation has denied the manner of accident and contended that a false case has been registered against the driver of the bus. According to the Corporation, on the said date, there was no accident, as pleaded by the respondents/claimants. That apart, it was also contended that the deceased had no valid driving licence. The accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased. Without prejudice to the above, the Corporation disputed the age, avocation and income of the deceased and the compensation claimed under various heads.

5. Before the Tribunal, respondents 1 and 2/claimants examined themselves as PW.1 and PW.2 respectively, and PW.3 is the Assistant, TNCSC, Villupuram Division. Ex.P1 - FIR, Ex.P2 - Post-mortem Certificate, Ex.P3 - Legal Heirship Certificate, Ex.P4 - Salary slip of the deceased and Ex.P5 - Motor Vehicles Inspector's Report, have been marked on the respondents/claimants. On the side of the appellant-Insurance Company, driver of the bus and Arani Branch Manager, have been examined as Rws.1 and 2 respectively and they marked documents, Judgment copy in C.C.No.202/2012 of J.M. Court, Polur, Trip Sheet and two photographs as Exs.B1 to B3. That apart, Ex.X1 - First Page of Service Book of the deceased, Ex.X2 - Salary Slip and Ex.X3 - Authorization Letter, have been marked.

6. On evaluation of pleadings and evidence, the Tribunal held that the driver of the bus, bearing Registration No. TN 25 N 0183, owned by the appellant-Transport Corporation, was negligent in causing the accident and quantified the compensation as Rs.29,25,300/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum and costs.

7. Being aggrieved by the finding, fixing negligence on the driver of the bus, the appellant-Transport Corporation has preferred the present appeal, on the following grounds,-

"(i) The Tribunal failed to note that the appellant's bus was not involved in the accident. The bus reached its destination without accident.

(ii) The Tribunal failed to note that the appellant corporation examined its driver as RW.1, who has deposed that there was no such accident. After he reached the destination, the police called him and stated that his bus hit a motorcyclist. The MVI report corroborated his evidence and it revealed that there was no damage caused to the bus. But the tribunal failed to note the same and fixed liability on the appellant.

(iii) The Tribunal failed to note that the criminal case registered against the driver of the bus ended in acquittal. The judgment of the criminal case has been marked as Ex.R1, corroborated the stand taken by the Corporation. The accident might have occurred due to the involvement of any other v