C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.M.VELUMANI,J.]

C.M.A.No.1840 of 2022 has been filed by the appellant-Transport Corporation against the judgment and decree dated 25.03.2022, made in M.C.O.P. No.12 of 2017, on the file of the Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Panruti. C.M.A.No.1943 of 2022 has been filed by the appellants- claimants challenging the negligence fixed on the deceased as well as seeking enhancement of the compensation granted by the Tribunal in the said award.

2.Both the appeals arise out of the same accident and same award.

Hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

3.For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank in the claim petition.

4.Initially, the claimants 1 to 5, along with one Sivakolundhu/6th claimant, filed M.C.O.P. No.12 of 2017, on the file of the Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Panruti, claiming a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Kannan, who died in the accident that took place on 15.07.2015. Pending claim petition, the said Sivakolundhu/6th claimant died.

5.According to the claimants, on the date of accident, at about

7.20 p.m., when the deceased Kannan was riding his Pleasure Scooter bearing Registration No.TN-82-Z-2206 from South to North with due care and attention slowly, near Mudavan Vadikal, Vaikkal Bridge, Vaitheeswarankoil, the driver of the Government Bus bearing Registration No.TN-68-N-0072 owned by the respondent-Transport Corporation drove the same in a rash and negligent manner from North to South, from Chidambaram to Tanjore, hit against the Pleasure Scooter driven by the said Kannan on the opposite road and caused the accident. In the accident, the said Kannan sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Bus owned by the respondent-Transport Corporation and hence, the claimants filed the said claim petition claiming compensation for the death of Kannan, against the respondent-Transport Corporation as owner of the Bus.

6.The respondent-Transport Corporation filed counter statement and denied all the averments made by the claimants. According to the respondent, on the date of accident, their Bus bearing Registration No.TN-68-N-0072 was driven by its driver from Chidambaram at 6.18 p.m in a careful manner, observing all the traffic rules and regulations. At about 7.20 p.m., while nearing Mudavan Vadikal, Vaikkal Bridge, Vaitheeswarankoil, on seeing the deceased Kannan who was riding his Pleasure Scooter without wearing helmet in a rash and negligent manner, the driver of the Bus honked and drove the Bus to the left side of the bridge. Without minding the signal given by the Bus driver, the deceased Kannan rode the Pleasure Scooter in a rash and negligent manner and dashed on the bumper of the Bus voluntarily and invited the accident. The accident occurred only due to the negligent riding of the Motorcycle by the deceased Kannan. Merely based on the FIR registered against the driver of the Bus, the sole negligence cannot be fixed on the driver of the Bus. The respondent has given objection letter through their driver for the FIR being registered against their driver. The rough sketch has been marked to prove the manner of accident. The passengers who traveled in the Bus are willing to adduce evidence in this regard. The claim petition is bad for non-joinder of owner and insurer of the Pleasure Scooter. In any event, the claimants have to prove the age, avocation and income of the deceased Kannan to claim compensation. As contended by the claimants, if the deceased Kannan was working as a Teacher and earning a sum of Rs.60,140/- per month as income, he ought to have paid Income Tax. In any event, the total compensation claimed by the claimants is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

7.Before the Tribunal, the 1st claimant examined herself as P.W.1, examined one Karthike