Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation v. Sunil Kumar
2013-11-25
S.VIMALA
body2013
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment 1. The Transport Corporation has filed the appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded. 2. The claimant, Sunil Kumar, aged 36 years, employed as security officer (SIPCOT), earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month, met with an accident on 02.07.2004. In respect of the injuries sustained, he claimed a sum of Rs.10 lakhs as compensation. 3. The Tribunal quantified the compensation at Rs.2,07,030/- and the break-up details are as follows: Taking the monthly income at Rs.3,500/- and adopting the multiplier of 16, in respect of 70% disability, the Tribunal has awarded the loss of earning capacity at Rs.1,76,400/-. Awarding pain and suffering at Rs.15,000/- and medical expenses, as per the bills, at Rs.15,630/-, totally, a sum of Rs.2,07,030/- has been awarded as compensation. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant / Transport Corporation has submitted that when the injuries sustained over the right hand did not result in amputation, the doctor has committed an error in fixing the percentage of disability at 70% and therefore, the award, which is based upon the incorrect percentage of permanent disability, should be set aside and the entire amount of compensation has to be re-calculated. 5. In order to appreciate the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, it is necessary to look into the details of the injuries sustained and the reasons stated for fixing the percentage of disability in the disability certificate. 5.1. In the discharge summary, which is filed as Ex.A-3, the following injuries are noted: 1) Fracture distal humerus 2) Segmental fracture ulna 3) Fracture distal 3rd radius 4) Dislocation Rad. Head. The details of operation performed has also been described in the discharge summary. 5.2. In the disability certificate, Ex.A-10, the doctor has stated that in the right leg, there is a bending to the extent of 25 degree and the restriction in the movement over the right knee is 60%. When there is restriction in the movement to the extent of 60%, one can infer that the right leg cannot be put into any constructive use. Moreover there is an added finding that the carrying capacity of the right hand is substantially reduced. Taking into account the details of the consequences of the permanent disability, one can infer that at least there should be functional disability to the extent of 60%. 6.
Moreover there is an added finding that the carrying capacity of the right hand is substantially reduced. Taking into account the details of the consequences of the permanent disability, one can infer that at least there should be functional disability to the extent of 60%. 6. As the claimant is a security personnel, the reduction in the carrying capacity in the right hand would have definite impact upon his capacity as security personnel, as he cannot carry weapons in his hand for a long time. Therefore, taking the functional disability at 60%,the compensation to be awarded towards permanent disability is Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.2,000/- x 60). 7. Having suffered injuries over the right hand in three places, pain and suffering is awarded at Rs.30,000/-. A sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transport expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards extra nourishment, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earning for two months and a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of enjoyment of amenities are awarded. Totally, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is awarded as compensation, reducing the award of compensation by Rs.7,030/-. 8. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed reducing the award of compensation by Rs.7,030/-, i.e. from Rs.2,07,030/- to Rs.2,00,000/-. It is represented that the appellant / Transport Corporation has already deposited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- together with interest and cost. The Transport Corporation shall deposit the balance amount of compensation along with proportionate interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of deposit, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount, less the amount already withdrawn, if any. No costs.