IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.2.2009 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.SUDHAKAR Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.342 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 Managing Director, State Express Transport Corporation Limited, T.N. Division I, Chennai-2. ... Appellant/Respondent vs. Thiru Sivaji Rao. ... Respondent/Petitioner Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 11.10.2004 passed in M.C.O.P.No.389 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Tiruvallur. For appellant : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy ----- JUDGMENT
The State Express Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 11.10.2004 passed in M.C.O.P.No.389 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Tiruvallur.
2. It is a case of injury. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 20.1.2001. The injured claimant Sivaji Rao, aged 50 years, working as a sales representative in M/s.Vimal Distributors, in Godown Street, Chennai, was travelling in the appellant transport corporation bus. Due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus, the bus hit a stationary lorry. In that accident the claimant and several other passengers, who travelled in the bus, sustained grievous injuries. After first aid, the claimant was treated at Stanley Government Hospital, Chennai from 28.1.2001 to 12.2.2001. He filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for the injury suffered in the accident stating that he was earning a sum of Rs.7,000/- per month at the time of accident.
3. In support of the claim, the injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. Dr.Sekar, was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-5 were marked, the details of which are as follows:-
Ex.A-1 is the copy of FIR, dated 28.1.2001,
Ex.A-2 is the copy of accident register dated 28.1.2001,
Ex.A-3 is the discharge summary dated 12.2.2001,
Ex.A-4 is the wound certificate dated 7.7.2004 and
Ex.A-5 is the disability certificate dated 3.6.2004.
On behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the respondent before the Tribunal, the driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of the appellant transport corporation.
4. The Tribunal based on the oral and documentary evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was rash and negligent in driving the bus and was responsible for the accident, in which the claimant suffered injuries and consequently, liability to compensate the injured claimant was fixed on the appellant transport corporation. Such finding of the Tribunal is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant and the same is confirmed.
5. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal based on the oral and documentary evidence, age, occupation, period of treatment, the nature of injury suffered by the claimant and the disability assessed at 65%, granted the following amount as compensation with interest at 9% per annum:-
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
1
Loss of income earning power
Rs. 25,000/-
2 Transport expenses Rs. 2,500/- 3 Extra nourishment Rs. 2,500/- 5 Disability assessed at 65% Rs. 65,000/- 6 Pain and suffering Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs.1,20,000/-
6. In appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that the sum of Rs.25,000/- granted towards loss of earning power is excessive when adequate compensation has been granted towards disability assessed at 65%. Therefore, the quantum of compensation has to be reduced.
7. While going through the award of the Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation on the above said contention for the following reasons:-
(i) The accident in this case happened on 28.1.2001. The injured claimant was 50 years old at the time of accident.
(ii) The claimant is a sales representative and has to move around from place to place. Due to accident, he has suffered fracture on both legs and therefore, his movement is affected. He was out of business till he recovered fully. Therefore, suitable compensation has to be given towards loss of income during the period of treatment and convalescence.
(iii) No amount was granted towards attender charges and physiotherapy expenses.
(iv) Considering all the above aspects, the sum of Rs.25,000/- granted towards loss of earning power, which is disputed by the appellant can be adjusted towards attender charges and towards physiotherapy expenses and the lesser amount granted towards transport and nutritious food expenses.
(v) Considering the above aspects, the total compensation granted by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- does not require any further reduction.
(vi) Though a ground was raised with regard to interest, the counsel appearing for the appellant at the time of admission, did not seriously disputed with regard to interest.
8. 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. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
17.2.2009
Index : No
Internet : Yes
ts
To
The Subordinate Judge,
(The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal)
Tiruvallur.
R.SUDHAKAR,J.
ts
Judgment in
C.M.A.No.342 of 2009
17.2.2009