CMA/2766/2023 of THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs S.N. SIKANDER BASHA on 16 September 2026

Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Mala J.)

(1) The Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal challenging the Award passed by the Claims Tribunal, dated 10.08.2022, made in MCOP.No.1403/2018, in awarding a compensation of a sum of Rs.46,57,000/- to the claimant.

(2) The parties will be referred to as per their rank in the appeal.

(3) The summary of facts are as follows:- The respondents 1 and 2 filed a claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs.70 lakhs as compensation for the death of their son Ibrahim, in an accident which occurred on 17.03.2018, at about 08.15 a.m., on Kovai-Singanallur Road. According to the respondents 1 and 2, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, who turned the bus to the right without sounding the horn or any indication and hit the two-wheeler of the deceased on the left side. Due to the impact of the accident, the deceased fell down from the two-wheeler, was dragged to a distance and later, succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident. According to the respondents 1 and 2, the deceased was aged 24 years at the time of the accident and was working as Assistant Systems Engineer in Tata Consultancy Services, Bangalore. Since the respondents 1

CMA No. 2766 of 2023 and 2 lost their only son and breadwinner, they filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.70 lakhs along with 7.5% interest per annum.

(4) The 3rd respondent-driver of the bus, remained exparte before the Claims Tribunal and the claim petition was contested by the appellant, owner of the bus. The appellant denied the manner of accident and further contended that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased. The appellant further disputed the age, occupation and income of the deceased and stated that the compensation claimed was exorbitant and speculative. Hence, it prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

(5) Before the Claims Tribunal, the 2nd respondent, the mother of the deceased examined herself as PW1 and marked Ex.P1 to P10. Exs.P11 to P13 were marked by consent through an eyewitness to the accident, who was examined as PW2. On the side of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.

(6) The Claims Tribunal, on an assessment of the entire evidence on record, and on the basis of the evidence of PW1, Exs.P1, P2 and P5, held that the negligence of the bus driver, the 3rd respondent, resulted in the accident. On the issue of liability, the Claims Tribunal held that the appellant, as the owner of the bus, was liable to pay the compensation to the respondents 1 and 2. On quantum, the Claims Tribunal, based on the Salary Certificate marked as Ex.P13, fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.30,000/-, added 40% of his income towards future prospects, and after following established

CMA No. 2766 of 2023 legal principles, awarded compensation of Rs.46,57,000/- along with 7.5% interest per annum. Aggrieved by the Award of the Claims Tribunal, the Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal.

(7) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the deceased Ibrahim was responsible for the accident since he was driving the two-wheeler with hectic speed and without wearing a helmet. The learned counsel further submitted that the compensation awarded was also on the higher side and hence, prayed for allowing the appeal.

(8) The learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 on the other hand, submitted that the Claims Tribunal, on proper appreciation of evidence, both oral and documentary, had awarded just and fair compensation and the same does not warrant any interference.

(9) We have heard both the learned counsels and also perused the materials placed on record.

(10) That the accident occurred on 17.03.2018, involving the deceased's motorcycle and the appellant's bus, is not disputed. The appellant only disputed the finding on negligence of the Claims Tribunal. According to the appellant, the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the two-wheeler driver, the deceased. We find that the FIR marked as Ex.P1, was registered against the driver of the appellant bus and the author of the FIR was also examined as PW2, who clearly deposed that the bus was driven by the driver rashly and negligently and that, at the place of occurrence, he

CMA No. 2766 of 2023 tried to overtake another vehicle and in the process, moved the bus to the extreme right side without sounding horn, thereby hitting the left side handle bar of the two-wheeler driven by the deceased. From the evidence of PW2, as corroborated by the FIR, it is clear that the negligent driving of the bus by the 3rd respondent, bus driver, caused the accident. Further, the Rough Sketch and the Charge Sheet were also filed to show that the appellant's driver was responsible for the accident. In the absence of any contra evidence by the respondents, we find that the Claims Tribunal was justified in relying on the aforesaid documentary and oral evidence of PW2 to return a finding of negligence against the appellant's bus driver.

(11) On the issue of quantum, we find that the Claims Tribunal, based on the Salary Certificate-Ex.P13, assessed the income at Rs.30,000/-. Since the salary of the deceased is proved through Ex.P13, we find no infirmity in the salary fixed by the Claims Tribunal. We also find that the Claims Tribunal adopted the correct legal principles for fixing the compensation towards loss of dependency at Rs.45,36,000/-. The Claims Tribunal has also paid the conventional damages towards consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses as per the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157 : 2017 (16) SCC 680. In view of the above discussions, we find no compelling reasons to interfere with the well considered judgment of the Claims Tribunal.

CMA No. 2766 of 2023

(12) In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is found to be meritless and hence, the same is dismissed and the judgment and decree of the Claims Tribunal, dated 10-08-2022 made in MCOP.No.1403/2018, is confirmed.

(13) The appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal, viz., Rs.46,57,000/- [Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Fifty Seven Thousand only] along with 7.5% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the date of deposit, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the web order of this judgment, if not already deposited. The respondents 1 and 2, on such deposit by the Transport Corporation, shall be entitled to withdraw the same along with the accrued interest, as per the apportionment directed by the Claims Tribunal, by filing appropriate application before the Claims Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (P.T.A.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 17-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AP To

1. III Additional District, Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Coimbatore.

2. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd, No 37, Mettupalaym Road, Coimbatore 641 043.

3. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Chennai.

CMA No. 2766 of 2023 P.T.ASHA J. AND N.MALA J. AP CMA No. 2766 of 2023 AND CMP NO. 25478 OF 2023 17-09-2026