w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n


The Managing Director, The State Express Transport Corporation Limited, Chennai v/s Minor Yaesika & Others

    C.M.A(MD)Nos. 287 to 290 of 2022 & C.M.P(MD)Nos. 2667, 2673, 2676 & 2679 of 2022
    Decided On, 04 April 2022
    At, Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN
    For the Appellant: P.M. Vishnuvarthanan, Advocate. For the Respondent: ------.


Judgment Text
(Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988, against the Common Order passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.579,580,581 and 582 of 2015, dated 12.07.2021, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Special District Court), Trichy.)

Common Judgment

1. All the four Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the appellant/Transport Corporation against the award passed in M.C.O.P.Nos.579,580,581 and 582 of 2015, dated 12.07.2021, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Special District Court), Trichy.

2. The common factor is on the question of liability and on the quantum of compensation.

3. The common facts for all the four claim petitions are as under:

On 1.1.2015 at about 4.00 a.m., in the early morning, at Trichy-Chennai National Highways Road, near Siruganur Natchathra Hotel while the deceased Manikandan was changing the punctured tyre of his lorry, at that time, without noticing the lorry parked on the leftern side of the road, on the mud portion, the driver of the Transport Corporation bus had driven the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the said Manikandan, driver of the lorry while he was engaged in changing the punctured tyre and due to the impact, he sustained injury and persons who sit front leftern side of the bus have also got injured and hence the son of the deceased Manikandan,lorry driver, has filed M.C.O.P.No.580 of 2015, for the death of his father, while the other three M.C.O.Ps' are filed by the passengers, who sat on the front leftern side in the Transport Corporation bus, for the injuries sustained by them in the said accident.

4. Before the Tribunal, a joint trial was conducted in all the four M.C.O.Ps' and common evidence was recorded. P.W.1 to P.W.5 were examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P15 were marked and Ex.X1 to Ex.X3 were marked. Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 were also marked on behalf of the Transport Corporation and its driver was examined as R.W.1

5. The learned Tribunal taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence adduced before it, has come to the conclusion that the accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Transport Corporation bus and accordingly, held that the Transport Corporation is liable to pay compensation to the claimants and also determined the quantum. Challenging the same, the present four Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed.

6. After hearing the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Transport Corporation and on perusal of the documents filed before this Court and the evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4, who are all the three injured claimants in the bus, have clearly deposed that they have seen the driver of the parked lorry engaged in changing the punctured tyre and at that time, without noticing the parking of the lorry, on the leftern side, on the mud portion of the road, driver of the transport Corporation bus drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the driver of the lorry, who sustained injury in the said accident and died.

7. On a perusal of Ex.P1-First Information Report, the manner of the accident has been spelt out and duly corroborated with the oral evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4. In view of the specific evidence of P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4, injured witness coupled with the evidence of P.W.1, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the transport Corporation bus and hence they are solely responsible for the accident, consequently, they are liable to pay the compensation.

8. On the point of quantum of compensation, I have gone through the evidence coupled with documents marked as Ex.X1, Ex.X2,Ex.X3, Ex.C1 to Ex.C3, which are all the Discharge Certificates issued by the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Government Hospital Medical Team, Tiruchirappalli and Atlas Hospital, Trichy respectively and based upon the said discharge certificates,quantum of compensation has been arrived at by the Tribunal. After perusing the various heads of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, I find that they are just and reasonable and hence both the points urged by the transport Corporation on the point of liability and quantum is unsustainable and cannot be countenanced and it is held tha

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
t the appellant Transport Corporation is liable to pay the compensation, as awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the award as ordered by the Tribunal, in all the four M.C.O.Ps' are to be confirmed and as such, all the four C.M.As' deserves no merit acceptance. 9. In fine, all the four Civil Miscellaneous Appeals stand dismissed and the award of the Tribunal in all the C.M.As' stand confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed.
O R