The appellant/Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited/first respondent has filed the above appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 24.02.2004, made in M.C.O.P.No.684 of 1992, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge & Special Judge), Salem awarding a total compensation of Rs.2,00,000/= to the claimants together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.
2. The respondents/claimants have filed the claim petition claiming a total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Aggrieved by the said award, the appellant/State Road Transport Corporation Limited has preferred this appeal before this Court.
3. The short facts of the case is as follows;
The claimants are the wife and son of the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder. On. 26.09.1991, at about 08.30 a.m., the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder was travelling in the ATC bus bearing registration number TML 7133 to go to Kokkarayanpettai from Tiruchengode. When the bus reached Kokkarayanpettai, it stopped and the deceased started getting down from the bus. Even before the deceased got down from the bus, the conductor blew the whistle and the driver suddenly moved the vehicle without noticing that the deceased had not yet get down from the front door of the bus and so the deceased fell down on the road and the back wheel of the bus ran over the deceased and the deceased died on the sport. The incident was reported to Molasi Police Station and a case in Cr.No.286 of 1991 was registered. The said accident took place only at the instance of the driver and the conductor. The second respondent was an employee/driver under the first respondent/State owned Transport Corporation. Hence, the first respondent is liable to pay compensation to the claimants.
4. The deceased Nachimuthu Gounder is physically hale and healthy and used to take firewood, vegetables and agricultural produce to Tiruchengode town from his village by a double bullock cart. As such, he was earning around Rs.2,000/- per month, and he was looking after his entire family as head of family. So, the claimants have filed the claim petition and claimed Rs.5,00,000/- as total compensation for the death of the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder, as his widow and son.
5. The appellant/State Transport Corporation, filed their counter statement and resisted the claim on the following grounds;
The appellant denied the age, occupation and the income of the deceased. The Transport Corporation alleged that the incident did not happen due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus and so the claimants are not entitled to receive compensation. Further, the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder did not travel in the said bus. The allegation made in the claim petition against the driver and conductor are false. The real fact is that the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder got down from the bus without taking his bag from the bus and after the bus moved, the deceased ran and tried to get into the bus, but unfortunately he fell down on the road and the bus ran over the deceased and so, the accident had happened due to carelessness and negligence on the part of the deceased and not due to the driver of the Corporation bus. Hence, the respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the petitioners as claimed. Further the claim of Rs.5,00,000/- is on the higher side.
6. The learned Tribunal framed two issues namely,
i)Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of driver of the bus bearing registration No. TML 7133 belonging to the State Transport Corporation and if so,
ii) Whether the petitioners are entitled to get compensation as claimed?
7. On the side of the respondents/claimants, two witnesses were examined as PW1, the first claimant herein and PW2 who travelled along with the deceased in the same bus. She noticed the incident and stated that it was due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver, the incident happened. Supporting the claim of the petitioners/claimants, four documents were markded as Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 namely i) certified copy of charge sheet filed before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tiruchengode, ii) rough sketch, iii) Motor Vehicles Inspector's report and iv) Postmortem Certificate of the deceased Nachimuthu Gounder. On the side of the respondent/Transport Corporation, RW1, one Kuppusamy, who was the driver of the bus, was examined.
8. After considering the claim petition, counter statement of Transport Corporation and evidence of both sides, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has come to a conclusion that the accident happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus bearing registration No.TML 7133, which belongs to the State Transport Corporation. Further, the tribunal, after considering the PW1's evidence, has come to a conclusion that the income of the deceased is not less than Rs.2,500/- per month. Hence, the Tribunal applying
Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicle Act, calculated the award as Rs.3,33,000/-. After deducting 1/3rd of the amount, the balance amount comes to Rs.2,22,000/-. The Tribunal rounded the figure as Rs.2,00,000/- and awarded the same to the claimants. Out of two lakhs, the first claimant is entitled to Rs.1,25,000/- and the second claimant is entitled to get Rs.75,000/- being the widow and son of the deceased respectively. The learned Tribunal further ordered that the said award amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till date of payment of compensation.
9. The appellant/State Transport Corporation challenged the award by way of the above appeal on two grounds i.e. negligence and quantum of compensation, stating that the monthly income of the deceased is on the higher side and the negligence should be attributed to the deceased.
10. For the foregoing reasons and on the consideration of the facts and circumstances and grounds of appeal, the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the view that the award amount awarded by the Tribunal is equitable and fair and hence the same has to be paid by the appellant/State Transport Corporation. The Court directs the appellant/State Transport Corporation shall deposit the balance amount to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.684 of 1992 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Salem within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. The Claimants/respondents are permitted to withdraw their respective amount after filing necessary payment out application in accordance with law. Resultantly, the civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. The parties are directed to bear their own costs in this appeal.
14.09.2009 Index:Yes Internet:Yes JIKR C.S.KARNAN,J JIKR PRE DELIVERY JUDGMENT IN C.M.A.No.793 of 2005 14.09.2009