VIJAYAKUMARI Vs. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellants/Petitioners, challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2006 made in MCOP.No.1286 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their litigative status before the Tribunal. It is a fatal case. The case of the Petitioners is that on 03.07.1991 at about 7.15 p.m., while the deceased Chandran was proceeding as a passenger in the respondent-Transport Corporation bus bearing Reg.No.TML-1915 and as he was getting down from the bus in the GST Road, opposite to DCM Toyoto Office, the driver of the bus suddenly moved the bus even before the deceased got down from the bus resulting in his fall and suffering fatal injuries and subsequently he died. The accident occurred due to rashness and negligence of the crew of the bus. The deceased was aged 33 years and he was earning Rs.1500 per month. Due to the accident, the Petitioners who are the wife, children and parents of the deceased have lost the bread winner of the family. Thus, the Petitioners sought for Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation from the respondent/Transport Corporation.

(3.) On the other hand, opposing the claim of the Petitioner by filing counter, the respondent-Transport Corporation contends that the accident does not occur as alleged by the Petitioners. The negligence of the deceased alone caused the accident. While the respondent bus was proceeding from Kamarajapuram to Broadway at normal speed while the bus was slowly proceeding due to heavy traffic, the deceased suddenly got down from the bus and in the process, fell down and suffered injuries resulting in his death. The deceased tried to get down from the bus where no stopping was provided. The deceased alone contributed to the accident due to his negligence. The claim of the Petitioners about the age, avocation and income of the deceased is not true. The amount claimed by the Petitioners is exorbitant. Thus the respondent sought for dismissal of the Petition.