IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 8.12.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3849 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Coimbatore Division-I, Chennimalai Road, Erode-1. ... Appellant/2nd Respondent vs. 1.M.Palanichamy, 2.S.Jagadeesan (Given up in appeal) ... Respondents/Petitioner and 1st respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 8.4.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Bhavani. For appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi ----- JUDGMENT
The Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 8.4.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.73 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Bhavani.
2. It is a case of injury. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 25.1.2006. The injured claimant M.Palanisamy, aged 57 years, running a brick chambers, was travelling in a TVS 50. He was hit by the appellant transport corporation bus driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner. In that accident, he suffered fracture of the right leg, tibia and fibula. He was treated at LKM Hospital, Erode. The initial treatment was given at Anthiyur Government Hospital. He claimed compensation in a sum of Rs.5 lakhs stating that he was earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month.
3. In support of the claim, the injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. Dr.Periasamy was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-13 were filed, the details of which are as follows:-
Ex.A-1 is the copy of FIR dated 25.1.2006,
Ex.A-2 is the copy of rough sketch dated 25.1.2006,
Ex.A-3 is the copy of observation mahazar dated 25.1.2006,
Ex.A-4 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector’s Inspection Report
dated 27.1.2006,
Ex.A-5 is the copy of charge-sheet dated 23.3.2006,
Ex.A-6 is the copy of wound certificate dated 12.3.2006,
Ex.A-7 series are the bills for payment in the hospital,
Ex.A-8 series are the medical bills,
Ex.A-9 series are the medical receipts,
Ex.A-10 is the doctors remarks,
Ex.A-11 and A-13 are the X-Rays and
Ex.A-12 is the disability certificate dated 20.2.2008.
The driver of the bus, the first respondent was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of appellant transport corporation, the second respondent before the Tribunal.
4. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus, who caused the accident and the liability of the appellant transport corporation to compensate the claimant is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant. Such finding is confirmed. The only contention raised by the appellant’s counsel in this appeal is on the quantum of compensation.
5. The Tribunal decided the issue relating to compensation in paragraphs 9 of the award onwards in answer to point No.2. As per the evidence of P.W.1, the claimant and that of the doctor P.W.2 based on Ex.A-6 wound certificate, the injuries are grievous in nature. The injured claimant was treated at Anthiyur Government Hospital and then L.K.M. Hospital at Erode from 25.1.2006 to 12.3.2006. On 25.1.2006 a steel plate was fixed and plastic surgery was performed to cover the wound. Several medical procedures were done and the same are extracted in the award of the Tribunal by placing reliance of Ex.A-10. The disability has been assessed at 24% under Ex.A-12. As far as the medical bill is concerned based on Ex.A-7 a sum of Rs.69,870/- was granted and based on Ex.A-8 and A9 a sum of Rs.21,909.21 was granted. The amount granted towards medical bills are not disputed. The Tribunal granted compensation under following heads with 6% interest per annum.
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
1
Pain and suffering
Rs. 25,000.00
2
Transport expenses
Rs. 5,000.00
3
Disability assessed at 24%
Rs. 36,000.00
4
Medical expenses as per Ex.A-7
Rs. 69,870.00
5
Medical expenses as per Exs.A-8
Rs. 21,909.21
Total
Rs.1,57,779.21 rounded of to 1.58,000.00
6. Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that for the disability assessed at 24%, a sum of Rs.36,000/- was granted, which is excessive. A sum of Rs.25,000/- granted towards pain and suffering is on the higher side. Therefore, the compensation has to be reduced.
7. On going through the details of the injury suffered, the long period of treatment for more than 2-1/2 months, this Court does not find any good reason to interfere with the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:-
(i) The accident in the case of injury happened on 25.1.2006. The injured claimant is running a brick chamber. Therefore he has to live by physical strength.
(ii) The injured claimant suffered fracture of the tibia and fibula. Steel plates were fixed and plastic surgical procedures were done. The injured claimant was in hospital for more than 2-1/2 months.
(iii) No amount has been granted for loss of income during the period of treatment, attender charges and extra nourishment.
(iv) Meagre amount has been granted for transport expenses.
(v) Medical bills are not in dispute and this is the major component of the award.
(vi) The interest granted by the Tribunal is only 6%
8. Considering the fact that no compensation has been granted on several heads as above, and the interest granted by the Tribunal is 6% only, this court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation and reduce the same any further.
9. Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks’ time to deposit the award amount and is granted and on
such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
8.12.2008
Index : No
Internet: Yes
ts
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
(The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal)
Bhavani.
R.SUDHAKAR,J.
ts
Judgment in
C.M.A.No.3849 of 2008
8.12.2008