Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs S.Pasakumar on 24 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A. No.486 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
No.12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem. .. Appellant
Vs.
S.Pasakumar .. Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 21.08.2013, made
in M.C.O.P. No.505 of 2012, on the file of the Additional District Court,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr. D.Venkatachalam
___
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-
Transport Corporation against the quantum of compensation granted by the
Tribunal in the award dated 21.08.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.505 of 2012,
on the file of the Additional District Court, (Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal), Namakkal.
2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P. No.505 of 2012, on the
file of the Additional District Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Namakkal. The respondent/claimant filed the said claim petition, claiming a
sum of Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in
the accident that took place on 11.04.2011.
3.According to the respondent, on the date of accident, he was
traveling in the Bus bearing Registration No.TN-27-N-1548 belonging to the
appellant-Transport Corporation. While he was trying to get down of the Bus
near Pelash Theatre Bus Stop on the Namakkal to Thuraiyur main road, the
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
driver of the said Bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner without
observing any road traffic rules. Due to the said impact, the respondent fell
down and sustained injuries. The accident occurred only due to rash and
negligent driving by driver of the Bus. In the accident, the respondent
sustained grievous injuries and hence, filed claim petition claiming
compensation against the appellant as owner of the Bus involved in the
accident.
4.The appellant-Transport Corporation, filed counter statement and
denied all the averments made by the respondent in the claim petition.
According to the appellant, on the date of accident, when the Bus belonging
to them was plying from Vellalapatti to Namakkal, while coming near the
IDBI Bank at Namakkal on the Namakkal to Thuraiyur road, the respondent
suddenly got down from the running Bus, lost balance and fell down from the
Bus and sustained injuries. The accident occurred only due to the negligent
act of the respondent who wantonly got down from the running Bus without
giving instruction to the driver. In any event, the respondent has to prove the
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
nature of injuries sustained, disability suffered, treatment taken, age,
avocation and income, to claim compensation. The total compensation
claimed by the respondent is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim
petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, the respondent examined himself as P.W.1,
examined two Doctors as P.W.2, P.W.3 and marked 14 documents as Exs.P1
to P14. The appellant examined driver of the Bus involved in the accident as
R.W.1, but did not mark any document.
6.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent
driving by driver of the Bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation
and directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.13,10,700/- as compensation to
the respondent.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
7.Questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in
the award dated 21.08.2013, made in M.C.O.P. No.505 of 2012, the appellant
– Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the respondent failed to prove his age, avocation
and income by letting any oral and documentary evidence. The Tribunal
ought not to have considered the percentage of disability assessed by P.W.2
and P.W.3 Doctors, which is on higher side. The Tribunal erred in adopting
multiplier method to award loss of future earning capacity, based on the
evidence of P.W.2-Doctor, when the disability sustained by the respondent did
not affect his future earning capacity. The Tribunal ought not to have awarded
the excessive sum of Rs.2,17,657/- towards medical expenses without
corroboration of the bills produced and marked as Ex.P8. The sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of marriage prospects is
on higher side. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
heads are excessive and prayed for reducing the compensation granted by the
Tribunal.
9.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the materials available on record.
10.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of
the respondent that in the accident, he suffered severe injuries and multiple
fractures all over the body and has taken treatment as in-patient at different
Hospitals viz., Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore for a period of 37 days, Verma
Hospital, Kancheepuram for a period of 11 days, Annai Physio Centre at
Sethamangalam for a period of 74 days and Karuna Hospital, Vellore for a
period of 90 days. Plates were fixed and removed after one month. P.W.2 and
P.W.3 Doctors examined the appellant and certified that the appellant suffered
65% and 80% disability respectively and issued disability certificates marked
as Exs.P12 & P14 to that effect. The Tribunal considering the evidence of
P.W.3 Doctor and the disability certificate marked as Ex.P14, accepted the
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
percentage of disability assessed by P.W.3 Doctor and fixed 80% as disability.
The same is in order. Considering the functional disability suffered by the
respondent, the Tribunal rightly adopted multiplier method to award
compensation towards loss of earning capacity. Hence, the same is not
interfered with. The Tribunal, on perusal of the medical bills marked as
Ex.P8, rightly awarded the sum of Rs.2,17,657/- towards medical expenses.
Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the respondent in the accident
and loss of marriage prospects, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
towards loss of marriage prospects. The same is not excessive. The total
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not excessive, warranting
interference by this Court.
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the
amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.13,10,700/- together with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit is
confirmed. The appellant-Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount already
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
deposited, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment, to the credit of M.C.O.P. No.505 of 2012. On such deposit,
the respondent is permitted to withdraw the award amount with interest and
costs, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn, by filing
necessary applications before the Tribunal. No costs.
24.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
gsa
To
1.The Additional District Judge,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.486 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
C.M.A. No.486 of 2021
24.02.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
