IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 31.03.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.925 OF 2011 & M.P.No.1 of 2011 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transportation Corporation Coimbatore Division – I, 37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore ... Appellant/2nd Respondent Versus 1.C.Ponraj ... Respondent/Petitioner 2.S.Ganesan ... Respondent/Respondent (R-2 given up) Prayer: This appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 27.04.2010 passed in M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2009 by the learned Sub Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udumalpet. For Appellant : Mr.S.S.Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.K.Kalyanasundaram (R-1) J U D G M E N T The above appeal has been filed by the appellant / State Transport Corporation against the award and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2009, dated 27.04.2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Udumalpet on awarding a compensation a sum of Rs.1,52,530/- 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. 2.The short facts of the case are as follows:- On 30.08.2008, at about 07.30 p.m., the petitioner was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN41-W-7330 on the Udumalpet to Pollachi Main Road. At that time, the respondent's bus bearing Registration No.TN38-N-1210, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcyclist. In the result, he had sustained grievous injuries. Hence, the claim petition was filed against the respondents for compensation of a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- with interest. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The respondent / Transport Corporation had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The respondent stated that in the said accident, two vehicles were involved. As such, the owner of the motorcycle and its insurance company are necessary parties but they have not been impleaded in the case. Actually, the accident had been committed by the rider of the motorcycle. Therefore, contributory negligence is to be attributed. The age, income and occupation of the claimant are denied. Besides, the claim amount is an excessive one. 4.On the averments of both parties, the Tribunal had framed two issues for consideration, namely; “(i)Who is responsible for the said accident? (ii)Whether the claimant is entitled to receive compensation?” 5.On the side of the claimant, two witnesses had been examined, viz., PW1-claimant and PW2-Dr.Krishnaraj and fifteen documents were marked, which are as follows:- First Information Report, Charge Sheet, Motor Vehicle Inspector's Report for both vehicles, Wound Certificate, Medical Discharge Summary, Medical Bill Series, Driving Licence, Xerox copy of R.C. Book, land documents of the claimant and etc. On the side of the respondents, the driver of the bus was examined. 6.PW1 had adduced evidence stating that on 30.08.2008 , at around 7.30 p.m., he was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN41-W-7330 towards Pollachi and at that time, the respondent's corporation bus, driven by its driver at high speed, overtook the motorcycle and stopped in front of motorcycle. As such, the accident had happened. PW1 further adduced evidence stating that immediately after the accident, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Udumalpet, wherein he had undergone preliminary treatment, thereafter he was referred to the Ramakrishna Private Hospital, Coimbatore, wherein he had undergone treatment for a period of 27 days as inpatient. He had spent a sum of Rs.1,22,530/- towards medical expenses. 7.PW2, the doctor had adduced evidence stating that the claimant had sustained bone fracture injuries and lacerated wounds in the said accident. His teeth were broken. 8.On considering the evidence of the witnesses, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,52,530/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 9.Aggrieved by the said award, the State Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10.The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the evidence of the driver of the bus had not been considered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- under the head of 'pain and suffering' which is on the higher side. 11.The learned counsel for the claimant argued that the medical expenses alone is a sum of Rs.1,22,530/-. In order to prove the same, medical bill series, Exs.P7 and P8 were marked. The rest of the compensation i.e., a sum of Rs.30,000/- is not sufficient under the necessary heads of pain and suffering, nutrition, transport, attender charges and loss of income during medical treatment period and loss of income due to disability. 12.On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments submitted by the learned counsels on either side and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court is of the considered opinion that after deducting the amount under medical bills i.e., a sum of Rs.1,22,530/-, the balance compensation amount i.e., a sum of Rs.30,000/- is not on the higher side. Considering that the claimant is entitled to receive compensation under the heads of nutrition, transport, attender charges, loss of income during medical treatment period and loss of income due to disability. Therefore, this Court does not find any discrepancy in the said award, hence, it is confirmed. 13.Therefore, this Court directs the appellant / State Transport Corporation to comply with the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal's / Sub Court, Udumalpet order passed in M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2009, dated 27.04.2010, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order by way of depositing the entire compensation amount with accrued interest, subject to deductions, if any already deposited. After such a deposit being made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw the entire compensation amount with accrued interest thereon lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2009, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Udumalpet, after filing a Memo along with this order. 14.Resultantly, the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the Award and Decree, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on the file of Sub Judge, Udumalpet made in M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2009, dated 27.04.2010 is confirmed. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/ Asst.Registrar //True Copy// Sub.Asst.Registrar r n s https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Udumalpet. 1 cc to Mr. S.S.Swaminathan, Advocate, Sr.No.23216 1 cc to Mr. K.Kalyanasundaram, Advocate, Sr.No.23454 C.M.A.NO. 925 OF 2011 vs(co) pmk.12.7.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/