Madras High Court
Unknown vs M.Babu on 19 June, 2019
Author: R.Mahadevan
Bench: R.Mahadevan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.06.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
C.M.A.No.2318 of 2004
The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Villupuram Division-II Ltd.,
Vellore -9.
(Cause title accepted vide order
dated 03.08.2004 made in
CMP No.12999 of 2004) ... Appellant
vs.
M.Babu ... Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 26.08.2003
made in M.C.O.P.No.764 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court No.II, Ranipet, Vellore District.
For appellant : Mr.S.V.Vasanthakumar
For respondent : No appearance
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation against the award of a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- towards compensation to the respondent/claimant due to the injuries sustained by him in a motor http://www.judis.nic.in 2 vehicle accident.
2. The case in brief is as follows:
On the fateful day, i.e., on 04.11.1996, at about 09.00 am, the respondent/claimant was travelling in a bus bearing Registration No.TN 23-N-0233 belonging to the appellant transport corporation. At that time, he tried to get down from the vehicle at Kalavai Bus stand. Without noticing the same, the driver of the bus suddenly started the bus. Due to the same, the respondent/claimant fell down from the vehicle and the back wheel of the bus ran over his right leg and he sustained compound fracture on his right leg. Stating that the accident had occurred due to the carelessness and negligence on the part of the driver of the bus, he filed a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. On consideration of the materials and evidence available on record, the Tribunal has fixed the contributory negligence at 50% each on the respondent/claimant and the driver of the appellant transport Corporation and quantified the total compensation at Rs.2,60,000/-, out of which, the appellant Transport Corporation was directed to deposit 50% liability (Rs.1,30,000/-) with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of petition. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant Transport Corporation has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
3.The learned counsel for the appellant Transport Corporation http://www.judis.nic.in 3 submitted that the respondent/claimant himself fell down from the bus and received fracture injuries and thereby invited the accident. Without considering the said fact, the Tribunal has erred in fixing 50% contributory negligence on the driver of the bus. He also submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant and disproportionate to the injuries sustained by the respondent and hence, the same has to be reduced.
4.Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record carefully and meticulously.
5.Despite service of notice and the name of the respondent having been printed in the cause list, there is no representation on his behalf. However, considering the passage of time, this Court proceeds to dispose of this appeal on merits.
6.As regards the question on negligence, P.W.1/respondent/ claimant stated in his evidence that on 4.11.1996 at 8.15am, he was travelling towards Arcot in the appellant Transport Corporation bus; he wanted to get down at Kalavai bus stand; the driver of the bus stopped the vehicle, but he took off it, before the claimant got down from the bus; as a result of the same, he fell down and the left front wheel of http://www.judis.nic.in 4 the bus ran over his leg and caused him fracture and multiple injuries all over his body. His evidence was corroborated by Ex.P1 -First Information Report, as per which, the criminal case was registered against the driver of the bus. On the contrary, the driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1, who stated that on 4.11.96, he took the bus from Mambakkam to go to Arcot at about 7.30am; he stopped the bus at Kalavai Bus stop and some passengers got down; On hearing the conductor's whistle, he started the bus; but the claimant got down from the bus, after the bus left the Kalavai bus stand; the conductor gave whistle again to stop the bus after travelling 50 feet as the respondent wanted to get down; but before the driver stopping the bus, the respondent jumped out of the bus and fell down in the front of the wheels and sustained grievous injuries. The Tribunal, taking note of the evidence and materials adduced by the parties, more particularly, the statement of P.W.1 in his cross examination that as the bus was at slow speed, he wanted to get down in the middle and he jumped out of the bus and fell down, has rightly come to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the carelessness and negligence on the part of both the respondent/claimant and the driver of the bus and accordingly, fixed the contributory negligence at 50% each on them, which finding this Court is not inclined to interfere.
7.With regard to the quantum of compensation, the claimant http://www.judis.nic.in 5 has deposed in his evidence that he was an agriculturist and earning Rs.100/- per day; in the accident, his right leg below knee was completely damaged and he was hospitalised for four months at Government Pentland Hospital, Vellore. The nature of the injuries sustained by P.W.1 was supported by the evidence of P.W.2/doctor, who issued Ex.P4 disability certificate to the tune of 50%. He also deposed that the claimant was examined on 30.06.2003 and his leg has been amputated 8cm below the knee. Ex.P2 is the wound certificate. Ex.P3 is OP chit. Taking note of all those oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has rightly taken the monthly income of the injured at Rs.1,000/- and adopted the multiplier of 15, based on the age of the injured at 35 years, and ultimately quantified the compensation under the head “loss of income” at Rs.1,80,000/- [1000 x 12 x 15], which this Court is not inclined to interfere. That apart, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards permanent disability at 50% and Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, which in the opinion of this Court, are just and very reasonable and hence, the same need not be interfered.
8.In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit 50% http://www.judis.nic.in 6 R.MAHADEVAN, J.
av of award amount with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgement. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the same to the savings bank account of the respondent/claimant through RTGS, within a period of one week thereafter.
19.06.2019
gbi/av
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
speaking/non-speaking order
To
1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Fast Track Court No.II,
Ranipet, Vellore District.
2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section,
Madras High Court,
Chennai 104.
C.M.A.No.2318 of 2004
http://www.judis.nic.in