The Managing Director vs Mani
2021 Latest Caselaw 17396 Mad

                                                                                   C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   DATED : 25.08.2021

                                                           CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

                                                C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021 and
                                                 C.M.P.No.14393 of 2021

            The Managing Director,
            Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (VPM) Ltd.,
            No. 3/137, Salamedu, Vazhureddy & Post,
            Villupuram.                                                          ...Appellant

                                                             ..vs..

            Mani                                                                 ...Respondent

            Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

            1988 against the judgment and decree dated 23.10.2018 made in M.C.O.P.No.357 of

            2016 on the file of the Motor accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub Judge,

            Pondicherry.

                                     For Appellant : Mr. K.J. Sivakumar

                                                    ****

                                                 JUDGMENT

This Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation challenging the Award

dated 23.10.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Sub Judge,

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

Pondicherry in M.C.O.P.No. 357 of 2016, directing the Appellant/Transport

Corporation to pay the Claimant a sum of Rs.7,81,280/- as compensation for the injuries

sustained in an accident which occurred on 13.01.2016 involving the bus owned by the

Appellant/Transport Corporation

2. Before the Tribunal, the Respondent/Claimant claimed a sum of Rs.12,70,000/-

as compensation for the injuries sustained by him. In support of his claim, on the side of

the Respondent/Claimant P.W.1 was examined and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked before

the Tribunal. On the side of the Appellant/Transport Corporation, no witness was

examined and no Exhibit was marked and the Court Exhibit is marked as Ex.X1.

3. On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the

Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.7,81,280/- as compensation to the

Respondent/Claimant. Details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the

impugned Award, are as follows :

Amount Heads awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) Loss of Earning power 5,14,800 Future prospects 51,480.0 Pain and sufferings 1,35,000

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

Amount Heads awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) Medical expenses 15,000.0 Rich and nutritious food 10,000.0 Transport expenses 15,000.0 Attender charges 10,000.0 Future medical expenses 10,000.0 Loss of Basic amenities 20,000.0 Total Rs.7,81,280/-

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material documents

available on record.

5. The Appellant has challenged the impugned award on the ground that mere

registration of an FIR is not enough for holding negligence on their part. The Claims

Tribunal ought not to have fixed the disability at 65% without any proof and the

monthly income fixed at Rs.6000/- is on higher side. Further, the compensation awarded

towards other heads are also excessive and the same needs to be reduced.

6. Insofar as the first contention raised by the Appellant is concerned, though the

Respondent/ Claimant has proved his case by filing an FIR, which has been marked as

Ex.P1, no contra evidence has been produced by the Appellant before the Tribunal to

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

disprove the contention of the Respondent/ Claimant that only due to the rash and

negligent driving by the driver of the bus owned by the appellant/Transport Corporation,

the accident had happened which resulted in injuries sustained by him. Therefore, this

Court is of the considered view that there is no basis for the appellant to contend that

mere registration of an FIR against the Driver of the bus without corroboration by any

other independent witness.

7. Insofar as the fixation of 65% disability on the Respondent/Claimant is

concerned, the same is supported by documentary evidence, which has been marked as

Exhibit Ex.X1 before the Tribunal. Admittedly, the Respondent / Claimant has

sustained i) Crush injury (R) hand with skinless ii) Exhusor loss in Right index finger

with exposure iii) exposed exhusor to middle finger with #bone of IMC iv) exposed

exhusor to ring finger with #bone of IMC v) exposed to little finger with #bone of IMC

issued by Indira Gandhi Government General Hospital as Exs.P5, P6, P7, P8 and P9.

The photographs of the Crush injury (R) hand is marked as Ex.P12. As per Ex.X1 –

Certificate issued by Medical Board for the disability of the Petitioner, the disability

assessed at 65% and considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the

disability @ 65%.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

8. As far as the monthly income of the injured is concerned, the Claims Tribunal

on considering the evidence of P.W.1 and considering his age and profession of the

claimant has rightly fixed a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month.

9. Considering the fact that the Claimant who is a fisherman, due to the injuries

sustained, would not be in a position to carry out his profession and even daily activities,

and by considering the Judgment of this Court in Dillibabu Versus Melvin Enterprises

reported in, 2013 (4) TLNJ 188 (Civil), multiplier method has been adopted for

calculating Loss of Earnings and awarded the compensation at Rs.5,14,800/-

(Rs.72,000 x 11 x 65%) which is not excessive.

10. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the Respondent/Claimant, the

quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the Respondent/Claimant under

various heads, totalling a sum of Rs.7,81,280/-, cannot be considered to be excessive, as

alleged by the Appellant/ Transport Corporation. For the foregoing reasons, this Court

does not find any merit in this Appeal and accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal

stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

11. The Appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire amount

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the

Claim Petition till the date of realization, less the amount, if any, already deposited to the

credit of M.C.O.P.No.357 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Principal Sub Judge, Pondicherry, within a period of eight weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed

to transfer the Award amount directly to the Bank account of the Respondent/Claimant

through RTGS, within a period of two weeks.

25.08.2021

Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No (arr)/(shk)

To:

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

1. The Motor accident Claims Tribunal, The Principal Sub Judge, Pondicherry.

2. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.2497 of 2021

(arr)/(shk)

C.M.A. No.2497 of 2021

25.08.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in