Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 3890 (MAD)

B. Prithiviraj v. M. Durai

2010-09-01

C.S.KARNAN

body2010
Judgment :- 1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant against the Award and Decree dated 06.01.2003, made in M.C.O.P.No.1417 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No.II, Chennai, awarding a compensation of Rs.50,000/- together with 9% interest per annum, from the date of filing petition till the date of payment of compensation. 2. Having not been satisfied with the said Award and Decree passed by the Tribunal, the appellant/claimant has filed the above appeal praying for additional compensation amount of Rs.50,000/-. 3. The short facts of the case are as follows: On 12.11.98, at about 1.00 p.m. the petitioner was riding his scooter bearing registration No.TN04 C5442, from north to south in Rajaji Salai, Chennai. At that time, the lorry bearing registration No.TNC 5089, belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner from behind. Due to which, he sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, after the said accident, he was taken to the hospital for treatment. Regarding the said accident, a criminal case has been registered by the Traffic Investigation, C2, Elephant Gate Police Station, Central Range, Chennai-79, in Crime No.407/C-2/98. The accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the respondents lorry. As such, he claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation before the Tribunal. 4. The second respondent/the United India Insurance Company Ltd., in their Counter has resisted the claim petition, which reads as follows: "The second respondent submits that he has to prove that he was doing Pawn Broker business and thereby he was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month with material evidence. As far as the accident is concerned that he has to prove the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing registration No.TNC 5089. But as per the sketch of Police, its the negligent and lethergic riding of the petitioner, who rode the motorcycle bearing registration No.TN04 C5442. Hence, the fault is on the rider of the motorcycle. This second respondent also reserves his right in filing petition under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and filing additional counter in future. The second respondent further submits that the petitioner has to prove the injuries on him with medical evidence and this petitioner also had corrected the Insurance Policy Number also. This second respondent also reserves his right in filing petition under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and filing additional counter in future. The second respondent further submits that the petitioner has to prove the injuries on him with medical evidence and this petitioner also had corrected the Insurance Policy Number also. This respondent also denies the damage done to his clothes for a sum of Rs.1,000/-. This petitioner must also prove that he is unable to do work as before. The claim amount however is high and far reaching for this reason, he has to explain each and every item of the clause No.21 Part I and II. " 5. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed two issues for the consideration namely: (i) Who is responsible for the said accident? (ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation, If so what is the quantum of compensation? 6. On the petitioners side, the claimant himself was examined as PW1, one Amaldoss was examined as PW3 and Dr.Thiyagarajan was examined as PW4 and fifteen documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P15 namely Ex.P1-Discharge Summary, Ex.P2-Medical Bills, Ex.P3-Licence, Ex.P4-Partnership Deed, Ex.P5-Income Tax Card, Ex.P6-Driving Licence, Ex.P7-Death Certificate, Ex.P8-Legal Heir Certificate, Ex.P9-P.M.C.Report, Ex.P10-Postal Acknowledgement Card, Ex.P11-Letter, Ex.P12-First Information Report, Ex.P13-Sketch, Ex.P14-Post-mortem Report, Ex.P15-Disability Certificate. On the respondents side, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked. 7. The claimant, PW1 had adduced evidence stating that on 12.11.98, at about 1.00 p.m. he was travelling in his scooter bearing registration No.TN04 C5442, along with his wife, from north to south in Rajaji Salai, Chennai. At that time, the lorry bearing registration No.TNC 5089, belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him from behind. Due to which, he sustained grievous injuries and his wife had expired. Immediately, after the said accident, he was taken to the National Hospital, wherein he was admitted as in-patient from 12.11.1998 to 28.11.1998. Further, he adduced evidence stating that he was a Pawn Broker, as such, he was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. PW4, Dr.Thiyagarajan, had adduced evidence stating that he examined the claimant and assessed the disability at 35%/-. 8. Further, he adduced evidence stating that he was a Pawn Broker, as such, he was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. PW4, Dr.Thiyagarajan, had adduced evidence stating that he examined the claimant and assessed the disability at 35%/-. 8. After considering the evidence of PW1 and PW4, documents, which were marked as exhibits and nature of injuries, the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the first respondents lorry and awarded the compensation as follows: i. Rs.2,000/- under the head of transport expenses, ii. Rs.2,000/- under the head of nutrition, iii. Rs.1,000/- under the head of damage to clothes, iv. Rs.5,000/- under the head of medical expenses, v. Rs.5,000/- under the head of loss of income, vi. Rs.5,000/- under the head of pain and suffering, vii. Rs.20,000/- under the head of permanent disability, viii. Rs.10,000/- under the head of future loss of earning capacity, In total, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/-as compensation to the petitioner, together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. Further, the Tribunal directed the respondent to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.50,000/-together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation, within a period of two months from the date of its Order. In turn, the said amount to be deposited in ICICI Bank, No.17, Chamiers Road, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035, under a fixed deposit scheme, for a period of three years. Accordingly ordered. 9. Having not been satisfied with the said Award and Decree passed by the Tribunal, the appellant/claimant has filed the above appeal praying for additional compensation amount of Rs.50,000/-. 10. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant had vehemently argued that the medical bills for a sum of Rs.7,384/-was issued by the National Hospital. But, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/-. Further, the compensation awarded under the head of transport expenses and nutrition are on lower side. Further, the learned counsel submitted that Rs.5,000/- under the head of pain and suffering is on lower side, since the claimant was hospitalised for 10 days and the claimant had sustained 30% disability. But, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.20,000/-. Therefore, he seeks additional compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Further, the learned counsel submitted that Rs.5,000/- under the head of pain and suffering is on lower side, since the claimant was hospitalised for 10 days and the claimant had sustained 30% disability. But, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.20,000/-. Therefore, he seeks additional compensation of Rs.50,000/-. 11. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent argued that the award and decree passed by the Tribunal is a well considered one. After considering the evidence of the witnesses, documents, which were marked as exhibits and the nature of injuries, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/-with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, which is fair and equitable. As such, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the claimant is not maintainable. 12. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perusing the award and decree passed by the Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the award amount is on the lower side. Hence, this Court awards the compensation as follows: i. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/-under the head of transport expenses, this Court enhances it to Rs.4,000/- under the same head, ii. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/-under the head of nutrition, this Court enhances it to Rs.5,000/- under the same head, iii. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/-under the head of damage to cloths, this Court confirms the same as it is pertinent, iv. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-under the head of medical expenses, this Court enhances it to Rs.7,384/- under the same head, v. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-under the head of loss of income, this Court enhances it to Rs.8,000/- under the same head, vi. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-under the head of pain and suffering, this Court enhances it to Rs.10,000/- under the same head, Vii. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/-under the head of permanent disability for 35%, this Court enhances it to Rs.35,000/- under the same head, viii. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-under the head of future loss of earning capacity, this Court confirms the same as it is pertinent, In total, this Court awards a sum of Rs.80,384/-as compensation. Originally, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/-. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-under the head of future loss of earning capacity, this Court confirms the same as it is pertinent, In total, this Court awards a sum of Rs.80,384/-as compensation. Originally, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Now, this Court awarded additional compensation amount of Rs.30,384/-, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. 13. Therefore, this Court hereby directs the respondents to deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest thereon, lying into the credit of the M.C.O.P.No.1417 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No.II, Chennai, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. After such deposit is being made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw the entire compensation amount with accrued interest thereon, lying in the credit of the M.C.O.P.No.1417 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No.II, Chennai, by making proper payment out application. 14. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and the Award and Decree dated 06.01.2003, in M.C.O.P.No.1417 of 1999, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court No.II, Chennai, is modified. No costs.