AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.—The appeal is preferred by the appellant-Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree dated
24.06.2003 made in M.C.O.P. No. 36 of 1999 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub-Judge) Thirupathur.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The injured Madhammal met with motor traffic accident on 13.12.1998 at about 01.45 hours. The said injured was travelling as a passenger in the
bus bearing registration No. TN.23.N.0978 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation from Thirupathur to Madras. The said driver of the
bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the lorry which was coming from opposite direction. Due to which, the
injured and some other passengers in the bus sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was admitted in Government Hospital, Tiruppathur. The
injured claimed a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation, before the Tribunal. The appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On
pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:
Who is responsible for the accident?
Whether the respondent is responsible to pay compensation to the claimant?
Whether the claimant''s negligence was responsible for the claimant sustaining injury?
If the respondent is responsible to pay compensation to the claimant, what is the amount?
After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the
driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation bus and awarded a compensation of Rs. 84,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of
the claim petition.
The details of the compensation are as under:
for extra-nourishment, transport and
medical expenses = Rs. 4,000/-
for pain and sufferings = Rs. 10,000/-
for disability = Rs. 20,000/-
for loss of income = Rs. 50,000/-
---------------------
Total = Rs. 84,000/-
---------------------
Aggrieved by that award, the appellant-Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of the award passed by the Tribunal and
contended that the award passed by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant without basis and justification. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.
20,000/- towards disability. 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 the counsel and perused the documents available on record. On the side of the claimants P.W.1 was examined and documents Exhibits
P1 to P4 were marked. P.W.1 is the respondent/claimant. Ex.P.1 is the copy of the First Information Report, Ex.P.2 is the Wound Certificate
issued by the Thirupathur Government Hospital, Ex.P.3 is the Wound Certificate issued by the Thirupathur Government Dentist. Ex.P.4 is the O.P.
Chit of the Rajapalayam Hospital. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation, one Sekar, the driver of the vehicle was examined and no
documents were marked to substantiate their claim. 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 appellant-Transport Corporation bus and the
finding is based on valid materials and evidence.
At the time of the accident, the injured claimant was 35 years old. In her evidence it is stated that she is a cloth merchant and was earning Rs.
5,000/- per month. Further, in her evidence, she has stated that the driver of the bus caused the accident and a case has been registered in Crime
No. 611/98 under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC of Ambur Circle Police Station. The claimant/injured further submitted that, due to the accident,
she sustained grievous injury and also lost two tooth and unable to walk and work as before. Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.3 are the wound certificates, in
which it is clearly stated that the claimant sustained fracture on its crown and contusion of both lips present and blood clot in the socket and further
it is stated that the above injuries are grievous in nature. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded Rs.
4,000/- for extra-nourishment, transport and medical expenses, which is very low. Therefore, it is reasonable to award Rs. 6,000/- towards extra-
nourishment, transport and medical expenses as against Rs. 4,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10,000/- towards
pain and suffering. The Learned Counsel for the claimant submitted that this amount is very low and meagre. After taking into consideration, the
wound certificate given by the Doctor, a sum of Rs. 15,000/- is awarded towards pain and sufferings as against the sum of Rs. 10,000/- awarded
by the Tribunal. Further, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded towards disability as well as a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards loss of income
due to disability. There is no dispute with regard to the fracture sustained and loss of tooth and certainly it will affect her business. The counsel for
the appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of
income whereas the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards permanent disability. It is also pertinent to note that the Doctor was not
examined and also there is no disability certificate. But taking into consideration the injuries sustained, it is reasonable to award Rs. 40,000/-
towards permanent disability and towards loss of amenities. It is stated by the Learned Counsel that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount
towards loss of income during treatment period. Even though there is no documentary evidence available on record, there is no dispute that she
took treatment in Government Hospital Thirupathur and also went to Puthur, Andhra Pradesh for further treatment. After taking into consideration
of the same, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards loss of income during the treatment period. The Tribunal awarded the interest
at 9% p.a. The date of accident is 13.12.1998. Taking into consideration the prevailing rate of interest at the time of the accident, the interest
awarded by the Tribunal is confirmed.
The details of the compensation amount are as given under:
for extra-nourishment, transport
and medical expenses : Rs. 6,000/-
for pain and sufferings : Rs. 15,000/-
loss due to disability as well as
loss of amenities : Rs. 40,000/-
loss of income during the treatment period : Rs. 6,000/-
-----------------
Total amount : Rs. 67,000/-
-----------------
Therefore the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs. 67,000/- (Rupees Sixty Seven Thousand Only) with interest at 9% p.a. as
against the sum of Rs. 84,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant-Transport Corporation that the appellant has deposited entire award amount with
interest of 9% and also the injured/claimant was permitted to withdraw 50% of the award amount as per order of this Court dated 24.10.2005.
Under these circumstances, the injured claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified compensation amount of Rs. 67,000/- with interest at 9%,
less the amount already withdrawn, on making proper application. 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. No costs.