IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.2.2009 Coram THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.291 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Division(11), Vellore-9. ... Appellant/2nd Respondent vs. 1.Pachai alias Pachiyyappan, 2.Murugesan. (2nd respondent was given up) ... Respondent/Petitioner and 1st respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 17.6.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District. For Appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi JUDGMENT The Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 17.6.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District. 2. It is a case of injury. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 2.8.2003. The injured claimant Pachai alias Pachaiappan, aged 51 years, an agriculturist and also engaged in ice business, was riding a cycle in Mambakkam. He was hit by the appellant transport corporation bus driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner. In that accident the claimant suffered fracture on the rib bone and right hand. He was treated at Arani Government General Hospital, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ thereafter at Vellore Government General Hospital for 10 days. Then he was treated in a private hospital. He filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- for the injury suffered in the accident stating that he was earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month at the time of accident. 3. In support of the claim, the injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. Dr.Kannan, was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked, the details of which are as follows:- Ex.A-1 is the copy of FIR, Ex.A-2 is the copy of wound certificate given in the Arani Government Hospital, Ex.A-3 is the certificate for having treatment in Vellore Government Hospital, Ex.A-4 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection Report, Ex.A-5 is the disability certificate and Ex.A-6 is the X-Ray The driver of the appellant transport corporation bus, the second respondent before the Tribunal, was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the second respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus, who is held responsible for the accident and the injury caused to the claimant, and the liability fixed on the appellant transport corporation to compensate the injured claimant is not seriously disputed by the appellant's counsel and the same is confirmed. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation. 5. The doctor assessed the disability at 40% under Ex.A-5 disability certificate. The Tribunal considering the age, occupation, nature of injury, period of treatment and the disability assessed, granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 For hand fracture Rs.15,000/- 2 For rib fracture Rs.15,000/- 3 Transport expenses Rs. 2,000/- 4 Pain and sufferings Rs.10,000/- 5 Disability assessed at 40% Rs.40,000/- 6 Cycle damages Rs. 1,000/- Total Rs.83,000/- 6. In appeal, the only plea urged by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the sum of Rs.15,000/- granted towards hand fracture and the sum of Rs.15,000/- granted towards rib fracture are not justified, as sufficient amount was granted towards disability. Therefore, the quantum of of compensation has to be reduced. 7. On going through the award of the Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation on the above said contention for the following reasons:- (i) In the accident which happened on 2.8.2003, in which the 51 years old agriculturist and also engaged in ice making businessman suffered fracture in his right hand and rib. He was treated in more than two hospitals consequent to the fracture suffered. As per Ex.A-3, the injured was treated in Vellore Government Hospital from 3.8.2003 to 13.8.2003. (ii) No amount was granted for loss of income during the period of treatment and towards attender charges. For the injuries suffered the claimant would have taken extra nutritious food. No amount was granted towards extra nutritious food. (iii) The injured suffered fracture in the hand and rib. During the period of treatment he would have suffered severe pain. The sum of Rs.10,000/- granted towards pain and suffering is very low. (iv) Considering all these aspects, the sum of Rs.15,000/- granted towards hand fracture and rib fracture can be adjusted towards loss of income during the period of treatment, attender charges, extra nutritious food and also to compensate for lesser amount granted towards pain and suffering. Hence, the total compensation in a sum of Rs.83,000/- does not require any further reduction as also the interest granted at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2003 and the award was passed in the year 2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8. Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount and is granted and on such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District. + 1 c.c. to Mrs. B. Vijayalakshmi, Advocate. S.R.No.5920. Judgment in C.M.A.No.291 of 2009 CK (CO) GSK 03.03.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/