AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.—This appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation against the award dated 31.12.2002 made in
M.A.C.T.O.P. No. 90 of 2002 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Additional District Judge) Nagapattinam.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The respondent/claimant is a Conductor in the appellant-Transport Corporation. On 12.12.1993, he was on duty in the bus bearing Registration
No. TN-49-N-0042. While the said bus was proceeding from Tiruvarur to Nagapattinam, the driver of the bus attempted to overtake the tanker
lorry bearing registration No. TN-01-F-1956. By overtaking, the driver of the bus lost this control and hit against the tanker lorry. Due to the
impact, the conductor sustained fracture in the left feet and also injuries all over his body. He claimed a sum of Rs. 5,86,000/- but restricted the
claim to Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation. The appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following
issues:
Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver or not?
What is the compensation the claimant is entitled to? If so, what is the amount and from whom?
After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,93,136/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of
petition and the details of the same are as under:
Pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/-
nourishment Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of income Rs. 83,136/-
Medical expenses Rs. 5,000/-
Disability Rs. 80,000/-
-------------
Total : Rs. 1,93,136/-
-------------
Aggrieved by that award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation questioned only quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and
vehemently contended that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification and that therefore, the
award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.
Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence on
record and came to the right conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance
with law and the same has to be confirmed.
Heard Mr. M. Krishnamoorthy, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. K. Jayakumar, learned Counsel for the respondent.
On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P113 were marked. On the side of the appellant-Transport
Corporation no one was examined and no document was marked to support their claim. P.W.1 is the claimant, P.W.2 is Dr. S. Rajendran and
P.W.3 is Dr. P. Rajagopal. Ex.P1 is the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the Motor Vehicle Inspector''s Inspection Report. Ex.P3. Is the
Wound Certificate Ex.P4 is the certified judgement copy of Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam. Exs.P5 is the Hospital admission and discharge
summaries slip. Ex.P6 is the Hospital admission and discharge summaries certificates. Ex.P7 is the Medical Records. Ex.P8 series are the Salary
Certificates. Ex. P9 is the Certificate given by Kumbakonam Chozan Transport Corporation. Ex.P10 is the Memo regarding no salary. Ex.P11 is
the History of treatment. Ex.P12 is the X-ray and Ex.P13 is the Disability Certificate. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the
Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus and the
finding is based on valid materials and evidence.
At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 50 years and he is working in the appellant-Transport Corporation. PW1-claimant has
deposed that he is earning Rs. 6,000/- per month. Due to the said accident, the claimant sustained the following injuries:
(i) Lacerated injury over the left dersum of the feet;
(ii) Lacerated injury over the right dersum of the feet;
(iii) Fracture and loss of 4 toes in the left feet.
After the accident, he was taken to Government Headquarters Hospital, Nagapattinam and taken treatment from 12.12.1993 to 7.2.1994 as in-
patient and also from 22.3.1994 to 25.3.1994 as out-patient. P.W.2 is Dr.Rajendran, who examined the injured. In his evidence he deposed that
the claimant sustained fracture in the left feet and also removal of 4 toes in the left feet. Accident register discloses that the claimant was treated as
out-patient from 12.12.1993 to 7.2.1993 and further from 22.3.1994 to 28.3.1994. Medical Records also corroborates the same. After
considering the oral and documentary evidence and the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/-
towards pain and suffering, which I feel is appropriate and reasonable. There is no serious dispute regarding the same. Therefore, the said amount
is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards nourishment. Considering the fact that the claimant/injured was treated in the
hospital for more than 5 months, the award amount is reasonable. Therefore, the said amount is confirmed. P.W.3 is one Dr. Rajagopal, who also
examined the claimant. Ex.P12 is the X-ray. After considering the wound certificate and other documents, he stated that restricted movement of
left feet and also due to the same the claimant is unable to stand, walk and also do any heavy work and assessed disability at 40%. Eex.13 is the
disability certificate. Normally the Courts award Rs. 1000/- to Rs. 2000/- per percentage of disability. In this case, the Tribunal awarded a sum of
Rs. 80,000/- towards 40% disability, which I feel is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/-
towards medical expenses. It is not in dispute that he was taking treatment in the private hospital. The award of the tribal is very reasonable and the
same is confirmed.
The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 83,136/- towards loss of income. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation
vehemently contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded the amount of Rs. 83,136/- towards loss of income. According to him, the
accident was occurred in 1993. He was working in the Transport corporation not as a Conductor and he was given alternative job due to the
injury. He was working upto 1996. After 1996, due to some reason he has taken leave. The Transport Corporation treated the same as
unauthorised leave and did not pay any amount. The same cannot be taken as loss due to disability and injuries. The learned Counsel for the
claimant also submitted that because of this injury, he is unable to do not only conductor work but also any other alternative job. Therefore, the
claimant took 101 days leave. The appellant-Transport corporation treated the same as unauthorised leave and no payment was made for the said
period. It is clear that there is no proof to show that the claimant took leave due to his injuries. It is also pertinent to note that the claimant was
attending the work from 1993 to 1995 and only from 1996 onwards he took leave. Therefore, the Tribunal is wrong in awarding Rs. 83,136/-
towards loss of income, which is unwarranted and the same is deleted. It is also seen that the claimant took treatment as out-patient from
12.12.1993 to 07.02.1993 and further from 22.3.1994 to 28.03.1994. The history of treatment-Ex.P11 corroborated the same. At the time of
admission, the income of the claimant was Rs. 3,000/- per month. Taking into consideration of the same, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.
15,000/- (Rs. 3,000/- x 5) towards loss of income during treatment period. The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussion
are as under:
Pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/-
nourishment Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of income during
the period of treatment Rs. 15,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 5,000/-
Loss due to Disability Rs. 80,000/-
-------------
Total : Rs. 1,25,000/-
-------------
Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- as against the compensation of Rs. Rs. 1,93,136/- awarded by
the Tribunal. The Tribunal has fixed the rate of interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition, which I feel is very appropriate and the same is
confirmed.
The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation has submitted that already entire award amount has been deposited.
The claimant has already withdrawn 50% of the award amount. Therefore, now the claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified award amount
of Rs. 1,25,000/- less the amount already withdrawn with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. The appellant-Transport Corporation is
also permitted to withdraw the balance amount on making proper application.
With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No
costs.