Madras High Court

P.A.Prasannakumar(Died) vs Ramasamy on 20 April, 2021

                                                                            C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 20.04.2021

                                                        CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                                 C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

                      1.P.A.Prasannakumar(died)
                      2.Seelatha
                      3.Aromal
                      4.Archa
                      (appellants 2 to 4 brought on record as LR's of the
                      sole appellant vide court order dated 08.03.2021
                      made in CMP.No.4337, 4344 & 4341 of 2021 in
                      CMA.No.582 of 2005)                                   ... Appellants

                                                         Versus

                      1.Ramasamy
                      2.Tamil Nadu State Transport
                         Corporation, rep by its Managing Director,
                        Ooty Depot,
                        Near Bus Stand, Otty.                               ... Respondents



                      Prayer:
                             Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                      Vehicles Act, against the fair and final order dated 27.08.2003 made in
                      M.C.O.P.No.57 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
                      cum II Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore.

                      Page 1 of 10


http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.582 of 2005



                                           For Appellants     : Mr.S.Thangavel

                                           For Respondents
                                                 For R2    : Mr.Sundaravadhanan

                                                 R1           : Notice dispensed with


                                                     JUDGMENT

This appeal is laid as against the fair and final order dated 27.08.2003

made in M.C.O.P.No.57 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal cum II Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore, thereby awarded the

compensation to the tune of Rs.1,90,000/-

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to

hereunder according to their litigative status before the Tribunal.

3. The case of the claimant is that that on 17.06.2001, when the

petitioner was travelling in a bus which was driven by the first respondent

owned by the second respondent between Ooty to Coimbatore, the first

respondent dashed against another town bus which was coming from the

opposite direction. Due to the said accident, the petitioner and the other co-

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

passengers have been thrown out from the bus, dragged due to the impact of

the accident. Due to the said accident, he sustained head injuries, fracture in

his left hand in three places, four lower front teeth fallen, laceratin in upper

lip and fracture maxilla with middle split. Immediately, he was admitted into

KR Hospital, Periyanaickenpalayam and thereafter he was transferred to KG

Hospital and Post Graduate Institute, Coimbatore on 17.06.2001. He was

discharged on 27.06.2001 and he had undergone various surgeries.

Therefore, the claimant filed claim petition seeking compensation at

Rs.6,00,000/-.

4. Resisting the same, the second respondent filed counter stating

that on 17.06.2001, the first respondent had taken the bus and proceeded

from Ooty to Coimbatore by following rules and regulations. While being so,

another bus came from Gandhipuram was driving in a rash and negligent

manner and dashed against the bus driven by the first respondent. Therefore,

the passengers who travelled in the bus driven by the first respondent

sustained grievous injuries and immediately they were taken to hospital at

Mettupalayam for treatment. He further submitted that the claim made by

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

the claimant is very high and also disputed the disability sustained by the

claimant and also future loss of earning.

5. On the side of the claimant, he examined P.W.1 to P.W.3 and

marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18. On the side of the respondents, examined RW1

and no exhibits were marked. On the basis of the evidence available on

records and also considering the submission made by the learned counsel

appearing on either side, the Tribunal awarded compensation of

Rs.1,90,000/- as compensation payable by the respondents jointly and

severally. Being not satisfied with the quantum of the compensation awarded

by the Tribunal, the claimant came forward with the present appeal for

enhancement of compensation.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the

claimant was Licenced Building Surveyor cum Contractor and he was

earning Rs.10,000/- per month at the time of accident and he was aged

about 45 years. Only because of the rash and negligent driving of the first

respondent the accident took place and he sustained grievous injuries in his

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

left hand, fractures in three places of his left land and head injuries. He also

lost his four lower front teeth due to the accident. Therefore, the disability

was assessed at 35%. Even then, the Tribunal failed to apply multiplier

method and awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- per percent. He further submitted

that the left hand was operated with plates and as such it has to be removed

by another surgery. It would cost a sum of Rs.10,000/- and also for fixing

artificial teeth, the expenditure would be at Rs.30,000/-. The court below did

not consider the same and passed only a sum of Rs.1,90,000/-.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second respondent would

submit that the accident took place in the year 2001 and as such the

compensation is quite just and reasonable and need not be enhanced

anymore. He further submitted that the disability is only partial disability. It

would not affect his avocation since fracture sustained by the claimant is in

his left hand. Therefore, the second respondent is not at all liable to pay any

compensation to the claimant.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

8. Heard Mr.S.Thangavel, learned counsel appearing for the

claimant and Mr.Sundaravadhanan, learned counsel appearing for the

second respondent.

9. On 17.06.2001, when the petitioner was travelling in the bus

driven by the first respondent, due to negligence of the first respondent the

accident took place and as such the claimant has sustained head injuries,

fracture in his left hand in three places, four lower front teeth fallen,

laceratin in upper lip and fracture maxilla with middle split. Immediately, he

was taken to KG hospital, Periyanaickenpalayam and thereafter he was

taken to KG Hospital and Post Graduate Institute, Coimbatore. He was

admitted as inpatient from 17.06.2001 to 27.06.2001 and he had undergone

surgeries on his left hand. He was also fixed with plates. PW2 doctor was

examined, who deposed that the claimant was admitted as inpatient from

17.06.2001 to 27.06.2001 and assessed his permanent disability at 35%. He

also deposed that future medical expenditure would cost Rs.40,000/- for

fixing the teeth and also to remove the plates which were fixed on his left

hand. However, the Tribunal failed to consider the said aspect and did not

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

award any amount for future medical expenditure. Further, petitioner was a

Licenced Building Surveyor cum Contractor and he had taken treatment and

he could not able to continue his job for a quite long period. He sustained

head injury and also four lower front teeth were broken.

10. Considering the above, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is enhanced as under :-

                          Sl.No          Heads             Awarded by the         Awarded by this
                                                             Tribunal                 Court
                          1       Permanent Disability       Rs. 35,000/-          Rs. 35,000/-
                          2       Medical expenses          Rs.1,20,000/-          Rs.1,20,000/-
                          3       Future      Medical             NIL              Rs. 50,000/-
                                  Expenditure
                          4       Pain and sufferings       Rs. 12,000/-           Rs.   25,000/-
                          5       Extra Nourishment         Rs.    3,000/-         Rs.   10,000/-
                          6       Loss of earnings          Rs.   20,000/-         Rs.   30,000/-
                                                  Total     Rs.1,90,000/-          Rs.2,70,000/-

11. In the result the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed as

follows:-

(i) The award passed by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.1,90,000/-

to Rs.2,70,000/-.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

(ii) The award amount will carry the interest at the rate of 7.5% per

annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit.

(iii) The appellants are entitled to get the modified award amount as follows:-

                                           First appellant    - Rs. 1,00,000/-
                                           Second appellant - Rs. 85,000/-
                                           Third appellant    - Rs. 85,000/-

(iv) The respondents are jointly and severally directed to deposit the

award amount, less the amount, if any, already deposited, along with

accrued interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy

of this Judgment.

(v) On such deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw their

share of the award amount along with proportionate interest and cost, less

the amount if any already withdrawn, as above by filing proper application

before the Tribunal.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.582 of 2005

(vi) The appellants shall pay requisite Court fee before the receipt of

the copy of the judgment for the enhanced compensation.

(vii) There shall be no order as to costs.