CRP(MD)/2464/2026 of The Managing Director Vs V.Boominathan on 8 September 2026

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the award, dated 22/01/2025 passed in M.C.O.P No.714 of 2023 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special District Judge, Madurai.

2. The brief facts are as follows:- On 26/02/2023 at about 6.00 p.m., the petitioner, Boominathan was riding a two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-59-CL-8961, on the Madurai–Viraganoor–Melur Four-Lane Road, with his mother, Muniyammal, travelling as the pillion rider. At that time, a bus belonging to the respondent/Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, bearing Registration No.TN-67-N-1296 allegedly driven in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the two- wheeler. In the accident, the petitioner sustained injuries and his mother sustained grievous injuries and subsequently succumbed to the injuries on 01/03/2023. The petitioner was treated as an outpatient. In connection with the accident, a case in Crime No.59 of 2023 was registered by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Madurai Traffic Investigation Wing No.II, under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC against the driver of the bus.

3. The petitioner was aged about 36 years at the time of the accident and was an Advocate by profession, earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. Claiming a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him, he filed the claim petition.

4. The respondent/Transport Corporation disputed the manner of the accident and contended that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent riding of the petitioner. According to the respondent, while attempting to overtake the bus on the left side near a police barricade, the petitioner lost control of the two-wheeler and fell down. It was further contended that neither the petitioner nor the deceased was wearing a helmet and that the petitioner did not possess a valid driving licence.

5. Before the Tribunal, P.W.1 was examined and Exs.P1 to P15 were marked on the side of the petitioner. On the side of the respondent, R.W.1, the driver of the bus, was examined. However, no documentary evidence was marked on behalf of the respondent.

6. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the respondent's bus driver and awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- as compensation to the petitioner.

7. Aggrieved by the said award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present Civil Revision Petition contending that the Tribunal failed to appreciate that in a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the burden is upon the claimant to establish that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle.

8. It is further contended that the claimant, while attempting to overtake the bus on the left side before the bus could completely cross the barricade, hit the barricade and lost control of the two-wheeler, resulting in the accident. According to the petitioner, the claimant had contributed to the occurrence of the accident and, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have fixed at least 50% contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. It is also contended that the Tribunal failed to consider the detailed accident report and the fact that the claimant was not wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. Hence, the petitioner Transport Corporation seeks to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal.

9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

10. It is seen from the records that the Tribunal, upon considering the evidence, particularly Ex.P1/FIR and Ex.P2/Final Report, as well as the evidence of P.W.1, rightly found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Transport Corporation bus driver. The Tribunal also noted that the FIR was registered against the bus driver under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC and that R.W.1, the driver of the bus, admitted the registration of the criminal case.

11. Insofar as the injuries sustained by the claimant are concerned, the Tribunal, upon consideration of the medical records, found that the injuries sustained by him were simple in nature and awarded a sum of

Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering. This Court finds that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just, fair and reasonable and does not warrant any interference.

12. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission itself, confirming the award passed by the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 08/09/2026 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No rm/er

To,

1. The Special District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madurai.

2. The Section Officer, VR/ER Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

R.POORNIMA.,J rm/er CRP(MD)No.2464 of 2026 08/09/2026