Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Savari on 21 December, 2013
Author: C.S.Karnan
Bench: C.S.Karnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.12.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN C.M.A.No.1609 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Vellore. ... Appellant Vs. Savari ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the award made in M.C.O.P.No.933 of 2006, dated 28.08.2008, on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvannamalai. For Appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi For Respondent : Mr.R.Suresh - - - J U D G M E N T
The short facts of the case are as follows:-
On 20.07.2005, at about 1 p.m., when the Transport Corporation bus bearing registration No.TN-23-N-0682, was stopped at Aarpakkam Madha Kovil bus stop, the claimant tried to alight from the bus. At that time, the conductor gave the whistle and the driver started the bus. As a result, he had lost his balance and fallen down on the floor and sustained injuries. Hence, the claim has been filed against the Transport Corporation.
2. The respondent in his counter has submitted that the bus was moving in a slow manner due to speed breakers on the road and at that time, the claimant had tried to alight from the moving bus and as a result, he had slipped and fallen down. As such, the accident had been committed by the negligence of the claimant. The averments in the claim regarding nature of injuries, mode of treatment and disability was also not admitted.
3. On considering the averments of both parties, the Tribunal had framed an issue, viz., "Whether the claimant is entitled to receive compensation? If so, what is the quantum of compensation?"
4. On the side of the claimant, two witnesses were examined and seven documents were marked, viz., F.I.R., Motor Vehicle Inspector's Report, wound certificate, accident report, charge sheet, X-ray and disability certificate. On the side of the respondent, the driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1 and he had marked the judgment of criminal Court as Ex.R1.
5. P.W.1 had adduced evidence that on 20.07.2005, at about 1 p.m., when he was trying to alight from the bus at Aarpakkam Madha Kovil Bus stop, the driver of the bus started the bus in a negligent manner on hearing the whistle of the conductor and as a result, he had lost his balance and fell down on the floor. He further stated that he had sustained fracture of bone in both his legs and that he had undergone treatment at Government Hospital, Thiruvannamalai and Government General Hospital, Chennai. P.W.2, doctor had spoken on the same lines of P.W.1 regarding nature of injuries and mode of treatment and also certified that the claimant had sustained 35% disability. He further stated that the fractured bone of his right leg had been mal-united.
6. R.W.1 had adduced evidence that initially a case has been registered against him for negligent driving and subsequently, he was discharged from the criminal proceedings since the prosecution had not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
7. On recording the evidence of both sides and on perusing the documents marked by both the parties, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.42,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
8. Against the said award, the Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal.
9. The very competent counsel, Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi submits that while the bus was proceeding in a slow manner, as there were speed breakers near the place of occurrence, the claimant had suddenly tried to alight from the moving bus due to which he had lost his balance and fallen down on the floor and sustained injuries. Therefore, the entire negligence lies only on the part of the claimant. Besides, the claimant had only sustained simple injuries but the doctor had assessed the disability at 35%, which is on the higher side. Further, the Tribunal had awarded the compensation in an arbitrary manner.
10. Mr.R.Suresh, the highly competent counsel for the claimant submits that while the claimant was trying to alight from the bus, at the Madha Kovil bus stop, the driver of the bus started the bus on hearing the whistle of the conductor and as a result, the claimant had lost his balance and fallen down on the floor and sustained bone fracture injuries on both his legs. Initially, the claimant had been medically treated at Government Hospital, Thiruvannamalai and thereafter, he had been admitted at Government Hospital, Thiruvannamalai and thereafter he had been admitted at Government General Hospital, Chennai for better medical treatment, wherein, he had been hospitalized as an inpatient for a long period. The claimant was a poor agricultural coolie and after the accident, he is unable to do his avocation as an agricultural coolie. The doctor had assessed the disability in an appropriate manner, after examining the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and after scrutinizing his medical records. However, the Tribunal had not granted adequate compensation to the claimant. The driver of the bus had been acquitted from the criminal proceedings, but the Corporation cannot escape from its liability as the accident was caused by the negligence of the driver of the bus.
11. On verifying the facts and position of the case and on hearing the arguments advanced by the very competent counsels on either side and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court does not find any shortcomings in the conclusions arrived at regarding negligence, liability and quantum of compensation. As per evidence, it is seen that the claimant had sustained grievous injuries in the said motor accident, due to negligence of the driver of the bus. It is also seen that the claimant had taken treatment at two hospitals and had sustained 35% disability as per certificate given by medical practitioner. Hence, the award is confirmed.
12. This Court directs the appellant herein to deposit the entire compensation amount, as per trial Court's findings, with interest, after subtracting earlier deposits made by them, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After such deposit has been made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw the entire compensation amount with accrued interest thereon, lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.933 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvannamalai, after filing a Memo, along with a copy of this order.
13. In the result, the above appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.933 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvannamalai, dated 28.08.2008, is confirmed. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
21.12.2013
Index : Yes.
Internet : Yes.
r n s
To
The Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Thiruvannamalai.
C.S.KARNAN, J.
r n s
C.M.A.No.1609 of 2009 &
M.P.No.1 of 2009
21.12.2013