IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.12.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3854 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Valuthareddy Villupuram ... Appellant/Respondent Vs. R.Rajeswari .. Respondent/Claimant Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award made in MCOP.No.791 of 2003 dated 12/2/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Additional Sub Court Tindivanam. For appellant : Ms.B.Vijyalakshmi ----- JUDGMENT The Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award in MCOP.No.791 of 2003 dated 12.2.2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional Sub Court,Tindivanam. 2. It is a case of injury. On 18.6.2003, one Rajeswari, a milk vendor aged about 30 years standing at the bus stop was hit by the Transport Corporation Bus belonging to the appellant transport Corporation and in that accident, she suffered multiple injuries all over the body. She was treated at Pondicherry Government Hospital. She claimed a sum of Rs.1 lakh as compensation for the injuries suffered. 3. In support of the claim, the claimant passenger was examined as PW1, the doctor was examined as PW2 and Exs.A1 to A9 were marked. Ex.A1 is the copy of First Information Report, Ex.A2 is the copy of Accident Register, Ex.A3 is the discharge https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ slip, Ex.A4 is the series of medical bills given by the Neurologist for the treatment taken, Ex.A5 series are the Medical Bills, Ex.A.6 is the receipt given for E.C.G. Test, Ex.A.7 is the receipt for treatment given by the Neurologist, Ex.A8 is the Disability Certificate, Ex.A.9 is the X Ray and no documents were marked on behalf of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The finding of the Tribunal with regard to negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant Transport Corporation bus as responsible for the accident and consequential liability fixed on the appellant Transport Corporation to compensate the claimant is not disputed in this appeal by the counsel for appellant and the same is confirmed. 5. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation. 6.The issue relating to compensation was decided by the Tribunal from Paragraph 8 onwards in answer to Point No.2. According to the injured claimant, she suffered head injury and some of the teeth were broken. She also suffered injury to the left leg and bruises to all over the body. It is stated that she was inpatient in the Government Hospital, Pondicherry for 11 days. She has taken further treatment at Government Hospital at Pallavaram. Claimant further stated that due to the head injury, she was suffering constant pain. The nature of injury as stated are supported by Ex.A2, the Accident Register and discharge slip Ex.A3. The treatment given by Neurologist is supported by Ex.A4 records.The expenses for medicine is also supported by bills. The disability in this case was assessed at 14% under Ex.A5 and the doctor was examined as PW2 to speak about the injury and disability of the claimant. Considering the age, occupation of the injured claimant, the Tribunal fixed the income at Rs.3,000/- per month and determined the total compensation as follows: Sl. No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Injury Rs. 10,000/- 2 Disability 14% Rs. 14,000/- 3 Pain and suffering and Nourishment (Rs.3,000+ 2000) Rs. 5,000- 4 Loss of comfort Rs. 5,000/- 5 Transport charges Rs. 1,800/- 6 Medical Bills Rs. 3,464/- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 7 Loss of income Rs. 3,000/- Total Rs. 42,264/- The Tribunal granted compensation at Rs.42,264/- with 7.5% interest. 7.Learned counsel for the appellant stated that having granted some amount for disability assessed at 14% and for pain and suffering in a sum of Rs.3,000/-, a further sum of Rs.10,000/- towards grievous injury is not justified. She therefore sought for reduction in the quantum of compensation. 8.Though the said plea is reasonable, this Court is not inclined to reduce the compensation for the following reasons: The injured claimant is 30 years old and she is a milk vendor by occupation. She has suffered grievous injuries to the head, face and other parts of the body. She was inpatient for 11 days in Government Hospital, Pondicherry and thereafter she was given treatment as outpatient. She would be out of employment atleast for a period of three to four months and there will be loss of income.She will need the assistance of another person to take care of her till she recovers. In the accident which happened due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the transport Corporation, she has undergone pain and suffering at the time of treatment at General Hospital, Pondicherry and thereafter at the Private Hospital till she recovered. Therefore, she is entitled to get higher compensation for pain and suffering as against Rs.3,000/-. Even for disability assessed at 14%, considering the age and occupation she will be entitled to marginally higher amount towards disability. The claimant was treated in more than one hospital. Therefore, she would need further amount towards transport expenses. No amount has been granted for attender charges. 9. Considering all these aspects the sum of Rs.10,000/- granted for injury though not correct can be adjusted on other heads where lesser amount has been granted by the Tribunal. Therefore, the total compensation of Rs.42,264/- granted in this case does not warrant further reduction, as also the interest at 7.5% p.a., as the accident happened in the year 2003 and the award was passed in 2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. There will be no order as to cost. The counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount as per the order of the Tribunal and the same is allowed and on such deposit, the claimant will be entitled to withdraw the amount. VJY Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Additional Sub Court Tindivanam. + 1 cc to Mrs. B. Vijayalakshmi, Advocate SR No.69585 VSV(CO) SR/13.2.2009 Judgment in C.M.A.No.3854 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/