Skip to main content

High court orders TNSTC to pay 20.76 lakh to kin of accident victim

The Madurai bench of the Madras high court on Friday upheld an order of a Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Trichy, awarding Rs 20.76 lakh to the family of a government school headmistress who died in an accident in 2006.

While upholding the tribunal's order, the division bench of justices V Dhanapalan and V M Velumani dismissed an appeal filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC), Pudukottai.

The case pertains to the death of Lukkas Mary, who was working as headmistress at a panchayat middle school at Konnayampatti in Ponnamaravathi union in Pudukottai district.

Mary died on November 13, 2006 while riding pillion on a two-wheeler with her friend Irudayraj Leo on Pudukottai-Manaparai Road. She was on her way to a bank when a TNSTC bus coming in the opposite direction dashed against the two-wheeler. Though Leo escaped with minor injuries, Mary fell on the road and was crushed by the rear wheels of the bus. Mary died on the spot.

Claiming Rs 25 lakh as compensation with the rate of 12 % interest, Mary's husband P Simon Peter and their two children, Paul Pradeep and Jennifer Sofia, both minors then, filed a petition with the tribunal in 2007.

After two years of trial, the tribunal ordered the TNSTC, Pudukottai, to pay a compensation of Rs 20.76 with the rate of 7.5% interest in November 27, 2007.

The TNSTC filed an appeal in the high court challenging the tribunal's award arguing that the accident took place due to the negligence driving of both the drivers of the bus and two-wheeler and the tribunal had erred in fixing the liability only on the TNSTC alone.

The tribunal also failed to take into account the benefits such as pension the family of the victim would receive as she was a government employee, the appeal said.

After hearing arguments of both the sides, the high court bench said it is well settled that when two vehicles are responsible for an accident, claim can be made on any one of the owner of the vehicles and the tribunal had applied the ratio in proper perspective. The claim can be made only against the transport, the court said.

As far as quantum of compensation was concerned, the bench said it found no reason to interfere with the tribunal's order. "In the absence of any evidence to disprove the age and income of the deceased, also taking into account of the family circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the quantum awarded by the tribunal and accordingly, it is confirmed in all respects," the bench said.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/madurai/High-court-orders-TNSTC-to-pay-20-76-lakh-to-kin-of-accident-victim/articleshow/45582732.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more