IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23.12. 2008 CORAM:- The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A.Nos.4075 and 4076 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, division I, 3/137, Salamedur, Vazhuthareddy Post,. Villupuram-605 602 .. Appellant in both CMAs/Respondent Vs. A.Karuna .. Respondent in CMA.4075/08/Petitioner Chandrababu .. Respondent in CMA.4076/08 . . . Appeals filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 30.06.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No. 539 and 541 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court) Cuddalore. . . . For Appellant : Mr.V.Kasi Viswanathan For respondents : Mr.. . . . . . J U D G M E N T The State Transport Corporation has filed this appeal challenging the awards dated 30.06.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No. 539 and 541 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court) Cuddalore. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. This is a case of injury. The accident in this case happened On 10.12.2006 at about 16.15 hours. The claimants, namely, A.Karuna, aged 30 years, an agricultural coolie and Chandrababu, aged 45 years, an agricultural coolie were travelling in the appellant's Transport Corporation bus bearing registration No.TN-32-N-1911, which was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver. The vehicle turned turtle near a sugarcane field and many of the passengers in the vehicle suffered serious injuries. 3. In that accident, the said Karuna, the petitioner in M.C.O.P.539 of 2007 sustained fracture of 6th to 8th left rib bones and grievous injuries on his abdomen,neck, chest and all over the body. He was immediately admitted in Government hospital, Cuddalore and then he was shifted to Government hospital, Pondicherry. He thereafter took treatment in a Private hospital. He took treatment as an inpatient from 10.12.2006 to 12.12.2006. After the accident, the petitioner states that he is unable to attend his day to day work. He stated that he is unable to sit and walk and has difficulty in breathing. His chest movements are restricted. He claimed that he has become permanently disabled. As the sole breadwinner of his family, he filed a claim for compensation for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- stating that his income is Rs.4,500/- per month. 4. Chandrababu, the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.541 of 2007 sustained fracture of Spinal cord with resultant neurological deficit and injuries on chest, stomach and all over the body. Immediately he was admitted in Government Hospital Cuddalore and then at Government Hospital at Pondicherry. He also took treatment in private hospitals. He took treatment from 10.12.2006 to 15.12.2006 as in patient. After the accident, he claimed that he could not sit, stand, walk and do his day today work. It is claimed that he lost his earning capacity. He also suffered great pain and the movements of his backbone were restricted. He has to depend on others for his essential activities. Hence, he filed a claim for compensation for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- stating that his income is Rs.4,500/- per month. 5. In support of the claim, Karuna was examined as P.W.1 and Chandrababu was examined as P.W.3 and other injured persons were also examined as P.W.2 and P.W.4 to P.W.22. Documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.57.No oral or documentary evidence was let in on the side of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the Transport Corporation bus and the liability fixed on the appellant Transport Corporation to compensate the claimants is not disputed in the appeal and the same is confirmed. 7. In these appeals, the quantum of compensation is under challenge. The Tribunal on the basis of evidence on record decided the quantum of compensation as follows: As soon as the accident took place, the petitioner Karuna/P.W.1 was admitted in Government Hospital, Cuddalore for treatment which is seen from Ex.P.3, Accident Register copy and from there he was shifted to Government Head Quarters hospital, Pondicherry which is seen from Ex.P.4, Discharge slip and he took treatment as in patient from 10.12.2006 to 12.12.2006. The petitioner sustained multiple grievous injuries and fracture of 6th,7th and 8th left ribs due to the accident, which is seen from Ex.P.4. Ex.P.5 series are the prescriptions and Ex.P.6 is the medical prescriptions and bills for Rs.541.50. P.W.22, Dr.R.Venugopal who had examined the petitioner, Karuna found fracture of 6th , 7th and 8th left ribs. and had issued partial permanent disability Certificate Ex.P.54 on the basis of X-Ray In Ex.P.55, he opined that the petitioner is finding it very difficult to breath and also opined that the claimant will find it very difficult to do the normal daily work. He assessed the disability at 40%. Based on the injury, the disability, period of treatment, age, occupation and probable loss of income, the Tribunal granted the following amounts with 7.5% interest. Sl.N o. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 For Disab ility 40% Rs. 40,000/- 2. For pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/- 3 Shock and mental agony RS. 7,500/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs. 7,500/- 5 Transport Rs. 7 500/- 6 Medical expenses Rs. 540/- 7. Attendant charges Rs. 7,500/- 8. Extra nourishment Rs 7,500/- 9 Loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 10,000/- Total Rs. 1,08,040/- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8. As soon as the accident took place, the petitioner Chandrababu was admitted in the Government Hospital at Cuddalore for treatment which is seen from Ex.P.10 Accident Register copy in which it is found that the petitioner had suffered pain of spinal cord and the doctor opined that the injury is grievous in nature. From there he was shifted to Government Head Quarters hospital, Pondicherry evident from Ex.P.11 discharge slip. He took treatment as in patient from 10.12.2006 to 15.12.2006. Ex.P.12 is the Discharge Summary issued by the same hospital. Ex.P.13 is the treatment certificate issued by an Orthopaedic surgeon on 16.12.2006 and Ex.P.14 series is the medical bills for Rs.465/-. 9. P.W.22, Dr.R.Venugopal who had examined the petitioner/P.W.2 Chandrababu found compression fracture L1, Vertebra and anterior chip fracture L2 Vertebra and also fractures on the spinal cord. He had issued partial permanent disability certificate Ex.P.56 after taking X-Ray Ex.P.57 after perusing Ex.P.10 Accident Register Copy. Ex.P.11 and P.12 are the Discharge slip and discharge summary. Ex.P.13 is the treatment certificate issued by the hospital. The petitioner after the accident and injury, is finding it painful on movement of the spinal cord. The petitioner has difficulty to bend. The petitioner finds it difficult to carry heavy articles and to do his daily work. He assessed the disability at 40%. The Tribunal, therefore, granted the following amounts on various heads with interest at 7.5% p.a. Sl.N o. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 For Disability 40% Rs. 40,000/- 2. For pain and suffering Rs. 20,000/- 3 Shock and mental agony RS. 7,500/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs. 7,500/- 5 Transport Rs. 7 500/- 6 Medical expenses Rs. 470/- 7. Attendant charges Rs. 7,500/- 8 Loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 10,000/- 9 Extra nourishment Rs. 7,500/- Total Rs. 1,07,970/- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10. In both the cases, the claimants have supported the plea of compensation on the basis of medical records, doctor's evidence and the Disability Certificate and proved their loss of income. Considering the occupation, nature of injuries suffered, claimant's age, injuries suffered, Disability assessed and the compensation granted on various heads, this Court does not find any good reason to interfere with the quantum of compensation determined by the Tribunal. No valid ground has been stated as to how the compensation is excessive on one or other head. The interest granted at 7.5% is also confirmed since the accident in this case happened in the year 2006 and the award was passed in the year 2008. Any amount in excess by way of compensation will compensate for the marginally lower rate of interest granted by the Tribunal. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum fixed in both the cases by the Tribunal. 11. In the result, finding no merits, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks eight weeks' time to deposit the entire amount and is granted. On such deposit, the claimants will be entitled to withdraw as per the order of the Tribunal. PAL Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To 1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief judicial magistrate's Court, Cuddalore. 2. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras. + 2 ccs to Mr. V. Kasiviswanathan, Advocate SR No.72295, 72296 CMA Nos. 4075 & 4076 of 2008 KA(CO) SR/18.2.2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/