The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation vs G. Vaikundamoorthy

C.S. Karnan, J.—The revision Petitioner has filed the above revision against the Judgment and decree dated 24.06.2009 in E.P. No. 106 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 428 of 2007 in order dated 16.10.2010 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli.

The short facts of the case are as follows:

(i) The Respondent/claimant has filed a claim case in MCOP No. 428 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli against the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Tirunelveli. The claimant has claimed a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with 12% interest per annum, against the Respondents. The claimant has stated in his claim application that on 16.08.2007, he was travelling on a Tata sumo goods vehicle on the Tirunelveli main road. At that point of time, the Respondent''s corporation bus bearing registration No. TN-72-N-0625 came in the opposite direction and dashed against the claimant''s vehicle. In the result, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries. The said claim case was resisted by the Transport Corporation after filing counter statement. The learned tribunal Judge, after adjudication, had granted a sum of Rs. 2,49,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. The said award was passed on 24.06.2009.

(ii) The said compensation amount has not been paid by the Respondent corporation. Hence, the claimant had initiated execution proceedings in E.P. No. 106 of 2010 before the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli, for recovery the claim amount. The learned Judge, after giving sufficient opportunity to the Respondent/TNSTC for payment. This was not complied with by the State Transport Corporation. Hence, the learned Judge, has passed an attachment order for attaching the Respondent bus bearing registration No. TN-72-N-1267 on 13.10.2010. Aggrieved by the said attachment order, the Respondent corporation has filed the above revision.

The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that the Respondent corporation has not filed any appeal against the award and decree passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. As such, the award has become final. The Learned Counsel further argued that the award amount has not been deposited with accrued interest thereon within stipulated period. Hence, E.P. proceeding was initiated and the same was ordered for attachment of the bus of the Respondent for recovery of the said compensation amount. The Respondent corporation had wantonly and deliberated avoiding payment of compensation. The claimant, after met with an accident is suffering a lot.

The Learned Counsel for the Transport Corporation argued that the claimant had sustained simple injuries but the tribunal had assessed the compensation by adopting multiplier method which is not sustainable under law. The Learned Counsel has fairly admitted that the State Transport Corporation has not filed any appeal against the said award. For paying the compensation amount, some legal formalities have to be observed by the Respondent/State Transport Corporation for which some time is required for depositing the compensation amount. In order to prove their bona fides, the Respondent corporation has filed an affidavit stating that the corporation is ready to pay the decree amount along with accrued interest from the date of filing the claim petition till date of payment of compensation within a period of eight weeks. Therefore, the Learned Counsel for the corporation has prayed to set aside the execution order.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsels on either side and on perusing the attachment order passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tirunelveli, this Court is of the considered opinion that the State Transport Corporation is a State owned corporation which is operating buses for public convenience. Therefore, the bus shall not be attached. This Court views that there are other movable and immovable properties of the corporation which can be attached. If the bus is attached by the tribunal, the public will be put into inconvenience. Further, the revision Petitioner has given an undertaking by way of affidavit for depositing the compensation amount within a period of eight weeks. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the revision petition deserves to be allowed on condition that the compensation amount shall be deposited within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the attachment order will come into force. After such deposit has been made, it is open to the Respondent/claimant to withdraw the said amount, after filing a memo along with the order of this Court, lying in the credit of MCOP No. 428 of 2007, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli.

In the result, the above civil revision petition is disposed of with the above observations. consequently, the order and decretal order passed in E.P. No. 106 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 428 of 2007, dated 18.10.2010 is kept in abeyance. Further, this Court directs the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to release the vehicle at once, if the vehicle is in court custody. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There is no order as to costs. Accordingly ordered.