MANAGING DIRECTOR THE TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION VILLUPURAM DIVISION III LTD Vs. KAMAL KISHORE TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree dated 31. 03. 1999 in MCOP Nos. 2597/1996 and 2949/1996 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes at Chennai.

(2.) BACKGROUND facts in a nutshell are as follows:-On 23. 06. 1996 at about 8. 00 p. m. the deceased Jagadish Tiwari was travelling as a pillion rider in TVS-50 two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN-21-X-7614 which was driven by one Bawarlal Parekh in the National Highways Road, Chengalpattu. When the two-wheeler was nearing Jayavilas Hotel, a bus (Route No. 140) bearing Registration No. TN-23-N-0072, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from the opposite direction and dashed against the TVS-50 and caused the accident. Due to the accident, both the rider as well as the pillion rider were thrown into the road. The rider of TVS-50 has sustained injuries whereas the pillion rider has sustained fatal injuries and died. The respondents / claimants in CMA No. 948 of 2000 are the father and mother of the deceased Jagdish Tiwari. The respondent / claimant in CMA No. 1494 of 2007 is the injured. The claimants in CMA No. 948 of 2000 (MCOP No. 2597/1996) claimed a compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- and the claimant in CMA No. 1494 of 2007 (MCOP No. 2949/1996) claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- before the Tribunal. The appellant / Transport Corporation resisted the claims. On pleading, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:-

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the Transport Corporation has submitted that the bus belonging to the appellant bearing Registration No. TN-23-N-0072 did not involve in the accident and the appellant has nothing to do with the alleged accident. It is also submitted that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. It is also further contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in both these appeals are excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification. Therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.