BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 18/12/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.MURGESEN C.M.A.(MD)No.1242 of 2007 and M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2007 The Branch Manager, M/s.United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Trichy. ... Appellant/3rd Respondent Vs 1.A.Arokiyados ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner 2.S.Kamesh 3.A.Kaliyappa Pillai ... Respondents 2 and 3/ Respondents 1 and 2 Prayer Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2006, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1104 of 2004 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge), Thanjavur. !For Appellant ... Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan ^For 1st Respondent ... Mr.K.Mohanasundaram For Respondents 2 & 3 ... Exparte Before Tribunal * * * * * :JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and
decree dated 14.10.2006, passed in M.C.O.P.No.1104 of 2004 by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge), Thanjavur.
2. By consent of both sides this civil miscellaneous appeal is taken up
for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. Before the tribunal, the appellant is the 3rd respondent, the 1st
respondent is the petitioner and the respondents 2 and 3 are the respondents 1
and 2.
4. The brief case of the petitioner in the claim petition is as follows:
On 28.07.2004, at about 01.30 P.M., the petitioner was riding his bicycle from
West to East in Thanjavur – Trichy main road, opposite to Vallam Bus Stand on
the left side of the road. At that time, the first respondent who was riding
the motorcycle bearing registration number TN-45-P-9716 belonged to the 2nd
respondent was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the petitioner. A criminal case was registered in crime No.286 of 2004
under Sections 279 and 337 I.P.C. against the driver of the 1st respondent on
the file of Vallam Police Station. Due to that accident, the petitioner
sustained injuries, which resulted in permanent disability. At the time of the
accident the petitioner was working as an agricultural coolie and was earning a
sum of Rs.4,500/- per month. Due to the accident he lost his income. So, he
filed this petition claiming a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- before the
Tribunal.
4. The 3rd respondent filed counter wherein it was contended that the
petitioner has suddenly crossed the road and invited the accident; nature of
injuries, disability, period of treatment and expenses are not admitted; the
age, avocation and loss of earning mentioned in the petition are denied as
false; the amount of compensation claimed is very high and exaggerated and
hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were
examined and Exs.P.1 to P.10 were marked. There was no oral or documentary
evidence adduced on the side of the respondents.
6. On consideration of the evidence on both sides, the Tribunal fixed the
compensation at Rs.1,34,720/- (Rupees One Lakh and Thirty Four Thousand Seven
Hundred and Twenty only) with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition
till the date of deposit under the following heads:
1)For Loss of Income :Rs.1,26,720.00
2)For Pain and Suffering :Rs. 5,000.00
3)For Transport Expenses,
Medical Expenses, Damages
to clothes and
Extra Nourishment :Rs. 3,000.00
===============
Total :Rs.1,34,720.00
===============
7. Challenging the said award passed by the Tribunal, this appeal has been
filed. At the outset the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he is
not disputing the rash and negligence of the driver of the motorcycle and he is
only disputing the quantum. So, the finding of the Tribunal regarding the rash
and negligence of the driver of the motorcycle is confirmed. Now, the Court has
to consider only about the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal.
8. The point for determination in this appeal is:
(i) What is the just compensation?
9. Point : The victim sustained 44%, which was spoken by the doctor. The
doctor gave Ex.P.9, Disability Certificate after taking Ex.P.10, X-ray. The
victim is an agricultural coolie. Considering the fact that victim is an
agricultural coolie and he sustained 44% permanent disability and the nature of
the injuries this Court is of the considered opinion it will affect his earning
power. Though he claimed that he was earning a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month, the
tribunal fixed his monthly income at Rs.1,500/- and considering the age of the
victim as 35 adopted the multiplier 16 and arrived at the loss of income at
Rs.1,500/- x 12 x 44/100 x 16 = Rs.1,26,720/-. The learned counsel for the
appellant has correctly submitted that the tribunal has not deducted 1/3rd
amount from his income. So, after deducting 1/3rd amount from his income, the
loss of income is fixed at Rs.1,000/- x 12 x 44/100 x 16 = Rs.84,480/- (Rupees
Eighty Four Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty only). The Tribunal also awarded a
sum of Rs.5,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.3,000/- towards transport
expenses, medical expenses, extra nourishment and damages to properties, which
are reasonable. So, the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is reassessed as
under:
1)For Loss of Income :Rs. 84,480.00
2)For Pain and Suffering :Rs. 5,000.00
3)For Transport Expenses,
Medical Expenses, Damages
to clothes and
Extra Nourishment :Rs. 3,000.00
===============
Total :Rs. 92,480.00
===============
Accordingly, this point is decided.
10. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced from Rs.1,34,720/-
(Rupees One Lakh and Thirty Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty only) to
Rs.92,480/- (Rupees Ninety Two Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty only). In other
respects, the award of the Tribunal is sustained. No costs. Consequently,
connected M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2008 is closed.
sj
To:
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
(The Principal Subordinate Judge),
Thanjavur.