Consistent independent eyewitness evidence may sustain negligence findings over an uncorroborated driver’s account.

The claimants, dependants of Abdul Kalam, alleged that on 9 March 2019 a State Express Transport Corporation bus, driven rashly and negligently, crossed onto the wrong side of the road and collided with the Tata Magic vehicle in which the deceased was travelling, causing his death.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found the bus driver solely negligent and awarded ₹14,30,000 with interest at 7.2% per annum.

The Transport Corporation appealed, disputing both the finding on negligence and the quantum of compensation.

Whether the Tribunal was justified in fixing negligence on the driver of the Corporation bus

Whether the compensation of ₹14,30,000 awarded by the Tribunal required interference

The appeal was brought under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Court applied the principles governing appellate review of a Tribunal’s findings on negligence and assessment of motor-accident compensation.

It considered whether the Tribunal’s findings were unsupported by the evidence or affected by perversity or infirmity, and whether the compensation assessment departed from settled principles.

On negligence, the Court accepted the independent eyewitness’s account that the bus came onto the wrong side and collided with the Tata Magic.

It found that the FIR corroborated the occurrence and that the bus driver’s differing account, without independent corroboration, did not displace the eyewitness evidence.

The Tribunal’s finding was therefore not perverse or infirm.

On quantum, the Court considered the deceased’s age, occupation, and the Tribunal’s assessment of monthly income at ₹9,000, together with its application of the multiplier and deduction for personal expenses.

The Corporation produced no material showing that the award was excessive or that the calculation method was contrary to settled principles.

The Corporation was directed to deposit the award amount with accrued interest and costs, if not already deposited, within eight weeks of receiving the judgment; the claimants may withdraw the amount in accordance with the Tribunal’s apportionment.

No order as to costs.