IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.2.2009 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.SUDHAKAR Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.321 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Salem. ... Appellant/Respondent vs. Rajkumar. ... Respondent/Petitioner Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 21.8.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.31 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Attur. For appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi JUDGMENT The Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 21.8.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.31 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Attur. 2. It is a case of injury. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 22.12.2005. The injured claimant Rajkumar,aged 22 years, engaged in coconut business, was travelling in a two wheeler which was driven by one Gurumoorthy from Puthiragoundanpalayam to Valapady. The bus belonging to the appellant transport corporation, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the two wheeler. In that accident, the claimant Rajkumar,suffered fracture to the right leg. He was treated first at Valapady Government Hospital and then he was referred to Salem Government Hospital.He filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- for the injury suffered in the accident stating that he was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month at the time of accident. 3. In support of the claim, the injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. One Gurumoorthy, who drove the two wheeler was examined as P.W.2. Dr.Muthusamy was examined as P.W.3. Exs.A-1 to A- 11 were marked, the details of which as per the order of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribunal are as follows:- Ex.A-1 is the certified copy of FIR dated 23.12.2005, Ex.A-2 is the copy of accident register dated 22.12.2005, Ex.A-3 is the certified copy of charge sheet dated 4.7.2006, Ex.A-4 is the certified copy of rough plan dated 23.12.2005, Ex.A-5 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection Report in respect of the bus dated 24.12.2005, Ex.A-6 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection Report in respect of two wheeler dated 27.12.2005, Ex.A-7 is the certified copy of school transfer certificate of the claimant dated 29.6.2003, Exs.A-8 and A-10 are X-Rays, Ex.A-9 is the case sheet dated 22.12.2005 and Ex.A-11 is the disability certificate dated 21.4.2008. In the typed set, the counsel for the appellant has failed to incorporate the Ex.A-11 which is the disability certificate, thereby causing prejudice to the case of the injured claimant. The driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was examined as R.W.1. The certified copy of judgment in C.C.No.13 of 2007 was marked as Ex.B-1 on behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The Tribunal based on the oral and documentary evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was rash and negligent in driving the bus and was responsible for the accident, in which the claimant suffered injuries and consequently, liability to compensate the injured claimant was fixed on the appellant transport corporation. Such finding of the Tribunal is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant and the same is confirmed. 5. The Tribunal, based on the oral and documentary evidence, age, occupation, period of treatment, nature of injury suffered by the claimant, the disability assessed at 30% under Ex.A-11, granted the following amount 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 injuries Rs. 5,000/- 2 Transport expenses Rs. 2,000/- 3 Damage of watch and clothes Rs. 1,000/- 4 Loss of income during the period of treatment and convalescence Rs. 2,000/- 5 Pain and suffering Rs.15,000/- 6 Medical expenses Rs.10,000/- 7 Disability assessed at 30% Rs.20,000/- 8 Loss of earning Rs.20,000/- Total Rs.75,000/- 6. In appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that the sum of Rs.10,000/- granted towards medical expenses is not supported by document and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. Further, having granted compensation under the head disability, the compensation granted towards loss of earning is not justified. Therefore, the quantum of compensation has to be reduced. 7. While 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) The accident in this case happened on 22.12.2005. The injured claimant was 22 years old at the time of accident. (ii) The claimant was engaged in coconut business. Due to accident, he suffered fracture to the right leg. Therefore, suitable compensation has to be given towards loss of income during the period of treatment and convalescence. The Tribunal granted only a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment and convalescence. (iii) No amount was granted towards attender charges and extra nutritious food expenses. Meagre amount was granted towards transport expenses. (iv) Admittedly, the injured was treated at two hospitals. He would have spent some amount towards medical expenses. Even if the sum of Rs.10,000/- granted towards medical expenses is high, the same can be adjusted towards attender charges and extra nutritious food expenses, which were not granted by the Tribunal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (v) For 30% disability, a meagre sum of Rs.20,000/- alone was granted. Considering the date of accident, the same should be higher. The sum of Rs.20,000/- granted towards loss of earning can be adjusted towards the lesser amount granted towards disability and loss of income during the period of treatment and convalescence. (vi) Considering all the above aspects, the total compensation granted by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs.75,000/- does not require any further reduction. (vii) There is no dispute with regard to interest granted at 7.5% per annum as the accident in this case happened in the year 2005 and the award was passed in the year 2008. 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. 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 Subordinate Judge, (The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal)Attur. + 1 CC to Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi,Advocate,SR.6860 C.M.A.No.321 of 2009 KSK(CO) EM/6.3.09 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/