IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 14.02.2011
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.2143 of 2003
C.R. Ananthakumar ... Appellant
Versus
1. M. Kulandaivelu
2. M. Velusamy
3. United India Insurance Company Limited
Namakkal ... Respondents
Prayer:- This appeal is preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, against the Award and Decree dated 03.08.1994 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.436 of 1990 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional Subordinate Judge), Coimbatore.
For Appellant : Mr. A. Babu
For Respondents : No Appearance
- - -
J U D G M E N T
The above appeal has been filed by the appellant / claimant, against the award and decree dated 03.08.1994 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.436 of 1990 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional Subordinate Judge), Coimbatore.
2.The short facts of the case are as follows:-
On 13.03.1990, at about 04.30 p.m., when the petitioner was proceeding on his motorcycle on the Avinashi Raod, the respondent’s bus bearing Registration No.KRP-369 came at a high speed in the opposite direction and dashed against the motorcyclist. In the result, he had sustained grievous injuries including bone fractures. Hence, the claimant has filed the claim petition against the respondents and claimed a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- with interest.
3. The third respondent has filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The respondent denied the accident which had been committed by the first respondent driver. Actually, the first respondent had driven the lorry in a slow and cautious manner. The petitioner had driven his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and tried to overtake a bus going in front of him. As a result, the accident had occurred. The respondent denied the age, income and occupation of the claimant.
4. The second respondent had filed a counter statement and opposed the claim petition.
5. On pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal had framed two issues for consideration, viz.,:-
1. Did the first respondent commit the accident due to his rash and negligent driving?
2. Whether the claimant is entitled to receive compensation?
6. On the side of the claimant, two witnesses were examined and the claimant marked fourteen documents, viz., college identity card, judgment copy, driving licence of the claimant, Coimbatore K.G. Hospital records, medical bills, disability certificate and X-ray etc. On the side of the respondents, no witness was examined and no document was marked.
7. P.W.1, had adduced evidence stating that on 13.03.1990, at around 04.30 p.m., he was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-37-2673 from his college to his house. While, he was proceeding on the Avinashi Road, the first respondent had driven the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner’s vehicle. The First Information Report was registered against the driver of the lorry. He further stated that in the said accident, he has lost his right eye. Besides, he has sustained injuries on his right shoulder, right leg joint and right hand. He further stated that he had undergone treatment at K.G. Hospital, as inpatient. P.W.2 doctor after examining the claimant, assessed the disability as 75%. The doctor further adduced evidence that the claimant had lost his right eye. The claimant further stated that at the time of accident, he was studying in engineering course.
8. On considering the evidence of the witnesses, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.55,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. Aggrieved by this award, the appellant has filed the above appeal for additional compensation of a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- with interest.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant emphatically argued that at the time of accident, the claimant’s age was 19 years and he was studying in the second year engineering course. In the said accident, he has lost his right eye. Due to this accident, both his hands have become weak. The learned counsel further argued that after the accident, he lost his marriage prospects. The learned counsel in order to prove that the claimant lost his right eye, had marked photograph.
10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the claimant and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court is of the considered opinion that the claimant lost his right eye at the age of 19 years. He was studying in the engineering course at the time of the accident. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to receive additional compensation. Hence the Court awards compensation as follows:-
Rs.75,000/- towards disability (75% disability and loss of right eye);
Rs.15,000/- towards medical expenses;
Rs.5,000/- towards nutrition;
Rs.10,000/- towards pain and sufferings;
Rs.2,000/- towards transport charges;
Rs.4,000/- towards attendant charges; and
Rs.50,000/- towards loss of facial appearance and diminished marriage prospects.
In total this Court awards a sum of Rs.1,61,000/- as compensation to the claimant as it is found to be fair and equitable. After deducting the compensation awarded by the Tribunal i.e. a sum of Rs.55,000/-, this Court grants an additional compensation of a sum of Rs.1,06,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Therefore, this Court directs the third respondent/United India Insurance Company Limited, Namakkal, to deposit a sum of Rs.1,06,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till date of payment of compensation into the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P.No.436 of 1990 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
11. After such deposit has been made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw compensation with accrued interest thereon lying in the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P.No.436 of 1990 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, after filing necessary payment out application in accordance with law, subject to withdrawals if any, made already.
12. In the result, the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the Award and Decree dated 03.08.1994 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.436 of 1990 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional Subordinate Judge), Coimbatore, is modified. There is no order as to costs.
smn
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore
2. The Section Officer, VR Section
High Court,
Madras