SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74211

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mrs.Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER – Appellant
Versus
DEEPA – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI and CMP.No.3558 of 2022 The Divisional Manager Tamilnadu State Transport , Corporation Villupuram Ltd, Villupuram, Villupuram District-604 303. Appellant Vs

1. Deepa

2.Minor Nimuna D/O Suresh, minor rep by their mother and guardian the 1st respondent Deepa

3.Minor Jayashree D/O Suresh , minor rep by their mother and guardian the 1st respondent -Deepa

4.Naavappan

5.Thavursayee

6.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd No.140, Nungambakkam High Road Chottabai Centre, 2nd and 3rd Floor, Nungambakkam, Respondent(s)

Chennai - 600 034.

PRAYER This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act to set aside the judgment and decree dated 19/11/2019 passed in MCOP.No.256 of 2016 on the file of the MACT Special District Judge,Villupuram.

For Appellant(s): Mr.S.S.Santhosa Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Ram Prabu for Mr.L.Ramanathan for R1 To R4 Mr.P.Magesh for R6 R 5 - Refused

ORDER

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/ Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation challenging the judgement and decree dated 19.11.2019 passed in MCOP.No.256 of 2016 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Special District Judge), Villupuram, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,45,750/- as compensation.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

2.1. On January 18, 2016, at around 04.30 p.m., the deceased Suresh was driving an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.TN32 AF 4521 on the Chennai-Trichy road. A government bus bearing registration No. TN 21 N 1195, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the auto rickshaw, resulting in Suresh's instantaneous death. An FIR was registered against the driver of the bus bearing registration No. TN 21 N 1195 under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC at Vikravandi Police Station in Crime No.7/2016. The claimants have filed claim petition in MCOP.No.256 of 2016 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special District Judge) Villpuram and the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,45,750/-. Aggrieved over the award of compensation, the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd., has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

3. The first respondent has filed counter and contended that the claim petition is liable to be dismissed as the accident occurred solely due to the negligence on the part of the deceased Suresh, who drove his auto rickshaw bearing registration No. TN 32 AF 4521 in the wrong lane, from South to North on the Eastbound road, at high speed and under the influence of alcohol, whereas the bus bearing registration No.TN 21 N 1195 was being driven at a steady speed on the Villupuram – Trichy National Highway. Despite the bus driver's efforts to avoid the collision by applying the brakes, the auto rickshaw crashed into the bus. It is further contended that the petitioners have failed to prove their status as legal heirs and establish age, occupation, and income of the deceased. Therefore, the respondents are not liable to pay any compensation, and the claim petition deserves to be dismissed.

4. The third respondent filed a counter affidavit and contended that the claim petition is not maintainable, as the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased Suresh, who drove the auto richshaw without a valid license and the vehicle also lacked necessary documents, including insurance, permit and registration, and therefore, the third respondent insurance company is not liable to pay compensation to the petitioners, who have claimed an excessive amount without substantiating the age, occupation and income of the deceased as well as their legal heir status.

5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and exhibits Exs.P.1 to P.11 were marked in support of their claim. On the side of the second respondent, R.W.1 to R.W.2 were examined and exhibits Ex.R.1 to R4 wer

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top