IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 MACA.No. 251 of 2010() ---------------------- OPMV.923/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------ TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION, COIMBATORE DIVISION-1,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S):APPLICANT/2ND RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KRISHNA LATHA, W/O.MOHAN, CHAMAKKAD HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O., PULINKOOTTAM,PALAKKAD. 2. ARULKUMAR, S/O.NATARAJ, 191/3, THONDAMUTHUR, SAMATHUR, POLLACHI, TAMILNADU. R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011 ALONG WITH MACA NO. 1096 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.A.C.A.Nos. 251 of 2010 & 1096 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Both these appeals arise out of the same judgment and award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam in O.P.(MV) No.923 of 2006 dated February 18, 2009. M.A.C.A.No.251 of 2010 is filed by the 1st respondent in the O.P., who is the owner of the offending bus, while M.A.C.A.No.1096 of 2010 is filed by the claimant in the O.P. 2. The accident occurred on December 24, 2004 at about 8 a.m. while the claimant was travelling in a bus bearing registration No.TN 37N 0651. When the bus reached at Gandhipuram Bus Stand, the claimant was getting down from the bus. At that time the 2nd respondent driver took the bus forward and the claimant was thrown out of the bus and she sustained serious injuries. Alleging negligence against the 2nd respondent, the claimant filed the O.P. before the Tribunal under MACA 251/2010 2 section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs.3,50,000/-. 3. The 1st respondent owner of the offending bus filed a written statement denying all the allegations and attributing negligence to the claimant. The 2nd respondent, driver of the offending bus, remained absent and was set ex parte by the Tribunal. 4. Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side of the claimant. No evidence was adduced by the respondents. On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent driver of the offending bus and awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,06,910/- with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant has filed M.A.C.A. No.1096 of 2010 claiming enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal while the 1st respondent in the O.P. owner of the offending bus has filed M.A.C.A.No.251 of 2010 contending that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. MACA 251/2010 3 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for the owner of the offending bus, the Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, represented by its Managing Director. 6. The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent is not seriously challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question, which arises for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 7. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,06,910/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as under:- Disability : Rs.15,360 Treatment expenses : Rs.33,000 Bystander expenses : Rs.11,550 Transportation expenses, : Rs. 5,000 Pain and suffering : Rs.30,000 Loss of income for treatment : Rs.12,000 Period. ------------------ Total : Rs.1,06,910 ======= 8. The claimant sustained the following injuries in the accident:- MACA 251/2010 4 1) Punctured wound in the lower aspect of right leg. 2) Fracture of both bones right leg. 9. PW1, the Orthopaedic Surgeon attached to the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur has certified in Ext.A8 that the claimant has malunited fracture of both bones right leg, stiffness of right knee and right ankle. His percentage of disability was assessed at 12%. Tribunal took the percentage of disability as 4%. 10. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the period of treatment he had undergone and the disability caused to him, we feel that a compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and not excessive. That being so, both these appeals have to be dismissed. In the result, the appeals are dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn.