IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.2.2009 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.SUDHAKAR Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.308 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Salem Division-I. ... Appellant/Respondent vs. Minor R.Hariharan, represented by next friend guardian Father D.Rajendran. ... Respondent/Petitioner Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 8.8.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Attur. For appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi ----- JUDGMENT
The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 8.8.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Attur.
2. It is a case of injury. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 9.4.2006. The minor claimant R.Hariharan, aged 4 years, at the time of accident, was hit by the appellant transport corporation bus. In that accident, the said Hariharan suffered fracture of the left shoulder and was treated at Salem Government Hospital from 12.4.2006 to 19.4.2006. The father of the injured claimant filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.3 lakhs for the injury suffered by his minor child.
3. In support of the claim, the father of the injured claimant, was examined as P.W.1. Dr.Rajamanickam, was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-7 were marked, the details of which are as follows:-
Ex.A-1 is the copy of F.I.R., dated 9.4.2006,
Ex.A-2 is the certified copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector’s Inspection
Report dated 10.4.2006,
Ex.A-3 is the certified copy of charge sheet dated 22.5.2006,
Ex.A-4 is the certified copy of wound certificate dated 9.4.2006,
Ex.A-5 is the discharge summary dated 19.4.2006,
Ex.A-6 is the X-Ray and
Ex.A-7 is the disability certificate dated 18.3.2006.
On behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the respondent before the Tribunal, the conductor of the bus was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of the appellant.
4. Based on the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to conclusion that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was rash and negligent in driving the bus and was responsible for the accident and the liability was fixed on the appellant transport corporation. Such finding of the Tribunal is not seriously disputed by the counsel for the appellant and the same is confirmed. The only contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is with regard to quantum of compensation.
5. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal based on Ex.A-4 wound certificate, Ex.A-7 discharge certificate, assessing the disability at 20% and also considering the nature of injury, granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum:-
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
1
Two simple injuries
Rs. 7,000/-
2
Transport expenses
Rs. 1,000/-
3
Medical expenses
Rs. 5,000/-
4
Pain and sufferings
Rs.15,000/-
5
Extra nourishment
Rs.12,000/-
6
Disability assessed at 20%
Rs.20,000/-
Total
Rs.60,000/-
6. In appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that a sum of Rs.7,000/- granted for two simple injuries is not justified and a sum of Rs.5,000/- granted towards medical expenses is not support by document. Therefore, the quantum of compensation is to be reduced.
7. On perusing 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 9.4.2006. The injured minor claimant, aged 4 years, suffered fracture of left shoulder. The child was treated in hospital from 12.4.2006 to 19.4.2006. The child will need further time to recover from the shoulder injuries.
(ii) The injured child may require physiotherapy to use the left shoulder as before. Therefore, considerable amount would have been spent for physiotherapy and for transportation. Whereas the amount granted towards transportation by the Tribunal is very meagre. No amount was granted towards physiotherapy.
(iii) No amount has been granted for attender charges. As the child will have to be taken care of by the mother and the father as well, thereby they would have lost their income during the period of treatment of their minor child.
(iv) The sum of Rs.7,000/- granted towards two simple injuries and the sum of Rs.5,000/- granted towards medical expenses can be justified towards the lesser amount granted towards transport charges and on the other heads, as stated above for which no amount has been granted.
(v) Considering all these aspects, the excess amount, if any, as contended by the appellant’s counsel, can be adjusted on one or other heads as above. There is no serious infirmity warranting interference by this Court as also the interest granted at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2006 and the award was passed in the year 2008.
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 and on such deposit, the same shall be invested as ordered by the Tribunal. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.2.2009
Index : No
Internet : Yes
ts
To
The Subordinate Judge,
(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal),
Attur.
R.SUDHAKAR,J.
ts
Judgment in
C.M.A.No.308 of 2009
12.2.2009