The court upheld the Tribunal's finding of negligence by the bus driver, affirming a substantial compensation award for the severely injured petitioner, indicating the importance of thorough evidence in motor accident claims.

JUDGMENT :

R. Sakthivel, J.

Feeling aggrieved by the Fair and Decretal Order dated December 21, 2018 passed by 'the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Additional District Court) Tindivanam' ['Tribunal' for short] in M.C.O.P.No.18 of 2014, the respondent therein, namely The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Branch, Tindivanam, has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2.For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be denoted as per their array before the Tribunal.

PETITIONER'S CASE IN BRIEF:

3.On March 31, 2012, at about 09.30 p.m., the petitioner was riding his Hero Honda motorcycle bearing Registration No. TN-32-T-7612 from Tindivanam towards Chennai. When he reached near Keel Aathanur X Cross Road, a bus bearing Registration No.TN-32-N-2115, belonging to the respondent – 'Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation' (TNSTC) was proceeding ahead of the petitioner. At that time, the driver of the respondent's bus, without any signal or caution and without any justifiable reason, suddenly applied the brakes. As a result, the petitioner, who was riding his motorcycle carefully and in compliance with traffic rules, dashed against the rear portion of the bus and sustained severe injuries. Immediately after the accident, the petitioner was admitted to the Government Hospital, Tindivanam and thereafter, he was taken to Apollo Hospital, Chennai for further treatment. The accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. The sudden application of brakes without any warning clearly establishes negligence on the part of the driver of the respondent's bus. At the time of accident, the petitioner was hale and healthy and was working as a Lecturer earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- as a monthly income. Due to the grievous injuries sustained, he has become incapable of performing his normal work and is unable to move from one place to another. Even at present, he is bedridden and there is no movement in his body. Hence, the petitioner filed the claim petition against the respondent – TNSTC and originally claimed a compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Only) for the injuries, disability and consequential losses suffered by him. Later by way of amendments vide I.A.Nos.37 of 2017 and 239 of 2018, the claim was enhanced to Rs.65,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Five Lakhs only).

RESPONDENT'S CASE IN BRIEF:

4.The respondent filed a counter statement denying all the allegations made by the petitioner in the Original Petition. The respondent contended that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent riding of the petitioner himself and not due to any negligence on the part of the driver of the respondent's bus. When the respondent's driver stopped the bus at bus stop to alight passengers, the petitioner who failed to maintain minimum distance with the ongoing respondent's bus, dashed against the bus from behind on the right side. The Criminal Case filed in this regard against the respondent's driver was closed as mistake of fact. The respondent further put the petitioner to strict proof of his age, occupation, monthly income, nature of the alleged injuries sustained, period of treatment, medical expenses incurred and percentage of disability, if any, suffered by him, by producing cogent documentary evidence. The Original Petition is bad for non-joinder of the owner and the insurer of the Hero Honda motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-32- T-7612. Stating so, the respondent prayed for dismissal of the Original Petition.

TRIBUNAL

5.At trial, on the side of