(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 27-06-2025 made in M.C.O.P No. 684 of 2023 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub-Judge MCOP at Thiruvannamalai.)

1. Unsuccessful Transport Corporation has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the negligence and quantum of compensation arrived by the Tribunal, vide award dated 27.06.2025 made in MCOP.No.684 of 2023, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub-Judge MCOP at Thiruvannamalai.

2. According to the claimant, on 09.03.2023 at about 15.00 hours, the claimant was travelling as a passenger in a Government Bus bearing Reg.No.TN 25 N 0281 towards Tiruvannamalai and while they were going near Sammanthanur Koot Road on Tindivanam to Tiruvannamalai Road, at that time, the driver of the bus drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two wheeler, due to which the the driver lost control of the bus and hence, the bus capsized on the road. Due to the accident the claimant, who travelled in the bus along with other passengers, sustained multiple grievous injuries.

3. The respondent Transport Corporation / appellant herein has filed a counter statement denying the averments made in the claim petition and stated that the driver of the bus was not rash and negligent at the time of accident. The accident occurred only due to the rash and negligence of the rider of the two wheeler and there was no fault on the drive of the bus. The rider of the two wheeler does not have valid driving licence at the time of accident. The claimant has not impleaded the owner and insurer of the two wheeler, who are necessary parties and therefore, the claim petition is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties.

4. The other two passengers who travelled in the same bus and sustained injuries also filed MCOP.Nos.682 of 2023 and 693 of 2023, each of them claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-. The Tribunal has conducted joint trial in all the 3 cases and recorded evidence in MCOP.No.693 of 2023.

5. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimant, the claimant himself was examined as PW1 and Exs.P1 to P5 were marked. On behalf of the respondent, the driver of the bus was examined as RW1 and through him Exs.R1 to R4 were marked. The Special Sub Inspector of Police was examined as RW2 and Ex.R5 was marked through him. The Disability Certificates issued to the respective claimants were marked as Exs.C1 to C3.

6. Upon appreciation of evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal found that as per Ex.P1- FIR, criminal case was registered against the two wheeler rider based on the complaint given by the driver of the bus. In order to prove the said fact, the respondent Transport Corporation has examined the driver of the bus as RW1, who deposed that on 09.03.2023, he has taken trip from Chennai towards Tiruvannamalai and driven the bus at a moderate speed by following the traffic rules and when the bus was proceeding near SKP Engineering College, in the opposite direction, the rider of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 25 Q 6206 has driven the two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner, came from right towards left side and stopped the two wheeler in the middle of the road, in the meant time, the driver of the bus noticed the same and hence he turned the bus towards right side in order to avoid the accident and hence the bus fell into the ditch on the right side of the road. Considering the evidence of RW2, who is the police official from the concerned police station and as per FIR and Ex.R5 – Final Report against the rider of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 25 Q 6206, which shows that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased Velayudham, rider of the two wheeler and therefore, the said final report has been closed as charge abated. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the evidence of the claimant, RW1 and RW2, found that the bus and the two wheeler collided with each other and taking into consideration, the MVI Reports of both the vehicles enclosed in Investigation Report (Ex.R1), which reveals that the front side parts of both the vehicles were damaged, the Tribunal concluded that the accident occurred due to the composite negligence of both the vehicles. The Tribunal, by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in APSRTC and Anr. v. K.Hemalatha and Ors. [Order dated 28.04.2008 in SLP(C)Nos.10950 – 10953 of 2005] has come to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the composite negligence of two vehicles and option was available that the claimant can claim compensation against the owner and insurer of any one of the said two vehicles.

7. As regards quantum of compensation, considering the fact that the injured claimant appeared before the Medical Board, the Disability Certificate under Ex.C1- issued by the Medical Board reveals that the claimant has sustained “Old Right Femur fracture with prosthesis (implant insitu)” and the medical board assessed the disability of the claimant as 12% and considering the fact that the accident took place on 09.03.2023, the Tribunal fixed Rs.7,000/- for each percentage of disability and awarded Rs.84,000/- under the head Permanent Disability. Considering Ex.P2 - Wound Certificate and Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 - Discharge Summary issued by the Government Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai and Kalyani Hospital, Chennai, which shows that the injured claimant has taken treatment as inpatient for 1 day on 09.03.2023 at Government Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai and taken further treatment as inpatient in Kalyani General Hospital, Chennai for 10 days from 10.03.2023 to 19.03.2023 and considering the injuries sustained by the claimant, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.45,000/- under the head Pain and Sufferings. The Tribunal has also awarded compensation under other heads, which is tabulated hereunder:

                  

Being aggrieved over the fixation of negligence and quantum of compensation, the appellant Transport Corporation has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the Tribunal failed to consider the fact that the accident occurred due to the rider of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN 25 Q 6206 and also failed to consider the fact that FIR and charge sheet was laid against the driver of the two wheeler, who died later and the charge as against him stood abated. The Tribunal failed to consider that the respondent has not produced any document to disprove the manner of accident. The Tribunal failed to consider the evidence of RW1 – Driver of the Bus and RW2 – Special Sub Inspector of Police and RW1 categorically deposed that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the two wheeler. Upon appreciation of evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal has rightly fixed composite negligence on both the vehicles and though the Tribunal concluded that the claimant has option to avail the compensation from the owner and insurer of any one of the two vehicles, however in the operative portion of the order, the Tribunal has directed the appellant Transport Corporation to pay compensation to the claimant. The claimant has also failed to implead the Insurer / Owner of the two wheeler in the claim petition.

9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent claimant would submit that upon appreciation of evidence adduced on either side and as per Ex.R3- Rough Sketch, it is clearly mentioned that the scene of occurrence is at the middle of the road and if the two vehicles were proceeding on the road in opposite direction to each other, they should keep the distance from the centre median line, but in the present case, the drivers of both the vehicles have not driven their vehicles within the centre median lane and also not followed the traffic rules and the Tribunal has rightly fixed composite negligence on both the vehicles. The learned counsel would further submit that considering the Medical Bills for the expenses incurred for the injured claimant, disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, nature of injuries sustained by the injured claimant and number of days he has taken treatment as in-patient, the Tribunal has rightly fixed compensation of Rs.7,000/- for each percentage of disability and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are also proper and reasonable and therefore, the award of the Tribunal does not require interference.

10. This Court considered the submissions made on either side and perused the entire materials available on record.

11. According to the claimant, on 09.03.2023 at about 15.00 hours, the claimant was travelling as a passenger in Government Bus bearing Reg.No.TN 25 N 0281 towards Tiruvannamalai and while they were going near Sammanthanur Koot Road on Tindivanam to Tiruvannamalai Road, at that time, the driver of the bus drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two wheeler and the driver of the bus lost control of the bus and hence, the bus capsized on the road. Due to the accident, the claimant who travelled in the bus sustained multiple grievous injuries. In order to prove the manner of accident, the injured claimant examined himself as PW1. On the contra, the appellant Transport Corporation side, the driver of the bus was examined as RW1 to disprove the case of the claimant and marked Ex.R1 – Report given by the driver of the bus to his management, Ex.R2 – Report given by the conductor of the bus to his Management and Ex.R3- Routh Sketch prepared by the Police.

12. RW1 deposed that on 09.03.2023, he has taken trip from Chennai towards Tiruvannamalai and driven by the driver at a moderate speed by following the traffic rules and when the bus was proceeding near SKP Engineering College, in the opposite direction, one rider of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 25 Q 6206 has driven the two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner and came from right towards left side and stopped the two wheeler in the middle of the road, in the meant time, the driver of the bus noticed the same and hence he turned the bus towards right side in order to avoid the accident and hence the bus fell into the ditch on the right side of the road.

13. It is pertinent to note that the respondent has not chosen to examine any eye witness or passengers in the bus to establish the fact that the accident was occurred due to the rider of the two wheeler, whereas in the case on hand, according to the claimant, he has travelled as a passenger at the time of accident and due to the accident, he sustained injuries. RW2 – The Special Sub Inspector of Police, has deposed that a criminal case has been registered against the rider of the two wheeler and final report has also been laid against him. As per the Final Report, the accident had occurred due to the driver of the two wheeler / deceased Velayutham and the final report has been closed as charges abated. It is also pertinent to note that as per MIV reports of both the vehicles enclosed in the Investigation Report – Ex.R1, the front side of both the vehicles got damaged due to head on collision with each other and considering the evidence of RW1 and PW1, the Tribunal has concluded that the accident occurred due to composite negligence of both the vehicles.

14. It is pertinent to note that as per Ex.R3 – Rough Sketch, it was clearly mentioned that the scene of occurrence is at the middle of the road and if the two vehicles were proceeding on the road in opposite direction to each other, they should keep the distance from the centre median line, but in the present case, the drivers of both the vehicles have not driven their vehicles within the centre median lane and also not followed the traffic rules and the Tribunal has rightly fixed composite negligence on both the vehicles. Though the Tribunal had fixed composite negligence on both the vehicles and granted option to the claimant to claim compensation against the owner and insurer of any one of the said two vehicles, in the operative portion of the award, the Tribunal had directed the appellant Corporation to pay the compensation. It is to be noted that the appellant did not implead either the owner of the two wheeler or insurer of the two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 25 Q 6206.

15. On perusal of Ex.C1 – Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Board, the disability of the claimant assessed by the Medical Board at 12% and in the absence of proof of document to show that the disability sustained by the claimant affects his earning capacity and there is no functional disability, the Tribunal has rightly chose to adopt percentage method and fixed Rs.7,000/- for each percentage of disability. The Tribunal, taking into consideration Exs.P2 to P3, which shows that the claimant has been treated as inpatient for 1 day on 09.03.2023 in Government Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai and thereafter, he has taken further treatment as inpatient in Kalyani General Hospital, Chennai from 10.03.2023 to 19.03.2023 for 10 days, has awarded Rs.45,000/- towards pain and suffering, which appears to be just and proper. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal for Extra Nourishment and Attender Charges @ 10,000/- each also appears to be just and proper. The Tribunal has awarded compensation towards Medical Expenses for Rs.1,73,622/- based on Ex.P5- Medical Bills.

16. The Tribunal taking into consideration the injuries sustained by the claimant i.e., Old right femur fracture with prosthesis (Implaint Insitu), has awarded Rs.45,000/- towards Loss of Amenities and considering he fact that the claimant is an agriculturist doing building construction works earning a sum of Rs.21,000/- per month tat he time of accident, in the absence of proof of same, the Tribunal has fixed Rs.11,500/- towards his monthly income and granted 5 months loss of income for treatment period and awarded Rs.57,500/- under the head Loss of Income during Treatment Period, which in the considered view of this Court appears to be reasonable and proper. The award of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference and this Court finds no merit in this appeal.

17. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed, confirming the award dated 27-06-2025 made in M.C.O.P No. 684 of 2023 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub-Judge MCOP at Thiruvannamalai. The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the compensation awarded by the Tribunal along with proportionate interest and costs, less amount already deposited if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same, less amount already withdrawn if any, on filing appropriate application before the Tribunal. The manner and mode of disbursement of compensation shall be as per the order of the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.