AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.—The appeal is preferred by the claimant against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge / Fast Track Judge No. IV of Madurai at Periyakulam on 23.07.2004 in MACTOP No. 133 of 2000.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The injured-Mayandi Thevar met with motor traffic accident that took place 26.03.2000 at about 15.15 hours. The injured was proceeding in the Bodi-Theni Main Road in his TVS-XL Super two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN-60-Z-2561 from East to West direction, keeping the extreme left side of the road. When he was proceeding near Ellaikaliammal Kovil, a lorry bearing Registration No. TCF-3431 belonging to the first Respondent, came from the opposite direction rashly and negligently and also at high speed. The said lorry went out of control and hit the TVS-XL two-wheeler, which the deceased was riding. Due to the said impact, the injured was thrown out of the two-wheeler and sustained multiple grievous injuries all over the body. The injured-claimant claimed a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-as compensation. The lorry was insured with the second Respondent / Insurance Company who resisted the claim. On pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
Whether the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry belonging to the first Respondent?
Whether the claimant is entitled to compensation? If so to what extent?
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 lorry belonging to the first Respondent and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,05,056.24 as compensation with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as follows:
Rupees Medical bills 30,535.24 Damages to the vehicle 6,221.00 Loss of income during the treatment period 12,000.00 Transport 1,000.00 Loss due to 54% disability 40,000.00 Pain and suffering 10,000.00 Damage to clothes 300.00 Extra nourishment 5,000.00 -------------- Total.... 1,05,056.24 ===============
Aggrieved by that award, the Appellant / claimant has filed the present appeal.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant /claimant vehemently contended that the Tribunal has awarded a very low and meagre sum of compensation and it is without any basis and justification. The Tribunal ought to have awarded the compensation as claimed by the claimant. The Tribunal has not considered the relevant materials and also not followed the principles of assessment before passing the award. Hence the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and this is a fit case for enhancement.
Learned Counsel for the second Respondent / Insurance Company has submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the materials and evidence on record and awarded the compensation which is just, fair and reasonable. Hence, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed.
Heard the counsel and perused the materials available on record. On the side of the claimant, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.P1 to P16 were marked. On the side of the Insurance Company, no one was examined and no document was marked. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 is the Doctor. Ex.P1 is the certified copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the certified copy of Wound Certificate. Ex.P3 is the Discharge Certificate. Ex.P4 are the X-rays. Ex.P5 are the bills issued by Vikram Hospital, Madurai. Ex.P7 are the bills issued by Vikram Hospital, Madurai. Ex.P8 are the hospital bills. Ex.P9 are the bills relating to X-rays and lab charges. Ex.P10 are the bills relating to spare parts for the two-wheeler. Ex.P11 are the bills relating to broiler business. Ex.P12 are the receipts relating to transport expenses. Ex.P13 is the certified copy of Charge Sheet. Ex.P14 is the certified copy of the Motor Vehicle Inspection Report. Ex.P15 is the certified copy of the judgment. Ex.P16 is the Disability Certificate. After considering the above 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 lorry belonging to the first Respondent. It is a question of fact and it is based on valid materials and evidence. Hence the same is confirmed.
The claimant was 55 years old at the time of accident. In his evidence, it is stated that he was running Saravana Broilers and selling broiler chicken and mutton in bulk and he was earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/-per month. Further, in his evidence, it is stated that only the driver of the lorry caused the accident. It is also stated that the driver of the lorry was charge-sheeted by the Bodi City Police, Bodi in Crime No. 156 of 2000 under Sections 279 and 337 IPC. Due to the accident he sustained the following injuries:
Compound segmental fracture right femur with the rupture and damage of scietic nerve, haemarthrosis right knee lacerated wound right for mm 15 x 5 cm size with exposure of muscles, lacerated wound over the right thigh lateral aspect, M/3-L/3 junction 10x5 cm underlying muscles exposed, deformity tenderness and creptus in the right middle third, lacerated wound 7x3 cm over the right knee tibial tubereosity with hemothresis, contusion over the right thigh and gluteal region and sensation absent in the right foot.
Immediately after the accident, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Bodi and he also took treatment in Vikram Hospital, Madurai. P.W.2, the Doctor, examined the claimant and assessed the disability at 54%. Ex.P16 is the Disability Certificate. Ex.P4 are the X-rays. Further, in his evidence, the Doctor has stated that the injured sustained fracture in the right femur and he also sustained grievous injuries all over the body and due to the said injuries, the claimant is unable to stand, walk and climb substantially. It is also stated that there is restricted movement of his right leg. After considering the above, the Tribunal also accepted the percentage of disability assessed by the Doctor and awarded a sum of Rs. 40,000/-towards 54% disability. Learned Counsel for the Appellant / claimant has vehemently contended that the amount awarded towards loss due to 54% disability is very low. Normally the Courts award a sum of Rs. 1000/-to Rs. 2000/-per percentage of disability. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to award Rs. 1500/-toward 1% of disability in the present case. If Rs. 1500/-is awarded towards 1% of disability, the loss due to 54% disability works out to Rs. 81,000/-. Therefore, the loss due to 54% disability stands modified from Rs. 40,000/-to Rs. 81,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1000/-towards transport. The claimant was admitted in various hospitals and there is no dispute regarding the same. After considering the same, I am of the view that the amount awarded towards this head is very low and it would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs. 8000/-towards this head. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10000/-towards pain and suffering. The amount awarded towards this head is very reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6221/-towards damages to the vehicle. Ex.P10 are the bills relating to the purchase of spare parts for the two-wheeler. The amount awarded towards this head is very reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 12,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period. The claimant was in the hospital for a period of 40 days and hence, certainly there would be loss of income during the treatment period. The Tribunal has correctly awarded Rs. 12,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period and hence the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 30,535.24 towards medical bills relying on Exs.P7, P8 and P9. Learned Counsel for the Appellant / claimant has vehemently contended that the Tribunal has not considered Ex.P5 and Ex.P6. There is no dispute that the claimant was taking treatment in various hospitals. Ex.P5 are the bills issued by Vikram Hospital, Madurai. Ex.P6 is the bill for the purchase of plate for fixing it in the leg. After considering the above, and also the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal has not considered Ex.P5 and Ex.P6. Therefore it would be reasonable to award an additional amount of Rs. 32,720/-towards medical bills relating to Ex.P5 and Ex.P6. Therefore, the total medical bills works out to Rs. 63,255.24 (Rounded off to Rs. 63,255/-). The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards damages to clothes at Rs. 300/-and towards extra nourishment at Rs. 5,000/-are very reasonable and hence they are confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded interest rate at 9% p.a., from the date of petition. Taking into consideration the date of accident, date of award and also the prevailing rate of interest during the relevant time, the rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. is very reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. The details of the modified compensation are as under:
Rupees Medical bills 63,255.00 Damages to the vehicle 6,221.00 Loss of income during the treatment period 12,000.00 Transport 8,000.00 Loss due to 54% disability 81,000.00 Pain and suffering 10,000.00 Damage to clothes 300.00 Extra nourishment 5,000.00 -------------- Total.... 1,85,776.00 Less: Amount awarded by the Tribunal 1,05,056.24 =============== 80,719.76 =============== (Rounded off to Rs. 80,720/-)
For the enhanced compensation, the claimant is entitled for an interest of 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition.
Under the circumstances, the claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs. 80,720/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. The second Respondent-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 80,720/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On deposit of the same, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same on making proper application.
With the above modifications, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.