- (1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited against the Judgment and Decree dated 14.9.2001 made in MCOP.No.224/1998 by the learned Sub Judge (MACT) Bhavani.
(2.) On 17.9.1997 at about 11.00 am, the 1st Respondent/claimant was travelling in the bus bearing Reg.No.TN-38-N-0184 belonging to the Appellant Corporation from Palani to Coimbatore enroute Pollachi. When the bus was proceeding near Thippampatti, the bus driver swerved down the bus and hit the lorry which was crossing it, due to which, the right hand of the claimant, who was seated in the rear seat near the window, was fully severed, causing permanent disability to 85 per cent. Hence, the claimant filed the above claim petition, claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- under various heads before the Tribunal. The Appellant in his counter filed before the Tribunal has stated that the claimant was negligent projecting his hand outside the window of the bus and there was no negligence or carelessness on the part of the driver of the bus and as such, no liability could be fastened on the driver of the bus. The Tribunal held that since the bus was driven without leaving space while crossing another vehicle in a negligent manner, the accident had occurred and therefore, held that the bus driver was negligent and holding so, awarded a sum of Rs.4,43,600/- as total compensation with interest at 9 per cent from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. As against the same, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited. This court heard the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and also perused the materials placed on record.
(3.) The Tribunal has analysed the evidence and rejected the contention of the Transport Corporation that the claimant was liable for contributory negligence, as he projected his hand outside the window of the bus. Mr.G.Muniratnam, the learned counsel for the Appellant contended that the Tribunal failed to consider the evidence of RW.1, the driver of the bus and erred in fastening the entire liability on the part of the driver of the bus.;