JUDGMENT :

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against award dated 26.06.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.213 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 2nd Additional District Court, Erode.

2. The appellant is the second respondent in M.C.O.P.No.213 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, 2nd Additional District Court, Erode. The respondents 1 to 4 filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one C.Thulasimani, who died in the accident that took place on 02.10.2007.

3. According to the respondents 1 to 4, on 02.10.2007, at about 4.30 p.m., while the deceased C.Thulasimani was riding his TVS Scooty bearing Registration No.TN-33-P-5342, came from West to East direction at the left extreme of the Erode to Perundurai Road, near Palayapalayam Privu. At that time, a Bus bearing Registration No.TN-33-N-1800 which was driven by the 5th respondent in a rash and negligent manner, dashed behind the TVS Scooty. As a result of which, the deceased was thrown off the Scooty and the bus ran over the deceased and he sustained multiple fractures and grievous injuries. Immediately he was taken to Government Head Quarters Hospital, Erode and there advised to be admitted in a private hospital. But, he died on the way to Private hospital due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident. Based on the above averments, the respondents 1 to 4 have filed the claim petition claiming compensation against the appellant/Transport Corporation.

4. The 5th respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

5. The appellant/Transport Corporation filed counter statement and denied the averments made in the claim petition. The appellant contented that the respondents 1 to 4 have to prove the age, occupation and income of the deceased and that they are the dependants of the deceased. In any event, the total compensation claimed is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

6. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent/wife of the deceased examined herself as P.W.1 and marked 14 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-14. On the side of the appellant, the 5th respondent/driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1 and no documents were marked.

7. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and directed the appellant-Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.4,87,275/- as compensation to the respondents 1 to 4.

8. Against the said award dated 26.06.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.213 of 2012, the appellant/Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal with regard to negligence and quantum of compensation granted to the respondents 1 to 4.

9. Mrs.Indhumathy, for Mr.A.Sundaravadhanan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation submitted her arguments. As per the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant the award is excessive, particularly Rs.3,52,275/- towards pecuniary loss, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses. The total award amount of Rs.4,87,275/- which is excessive and calling for interference by this Court. The learned Judge failed to note that the two wheeler suddenly crossed the path of the bus causing this accident.

10. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport Corporation and perused the materials available on record.

11. On perusal of the records, it is found that the competent person, the driver of the bus was examined whose evidence was not accepted in the light of the cross examination. On perusal of the award, it is found that the Tribunal, had assessed the evidence particularly documentary evidence furnished by the claimants is proof of the claim