Madras High Court
Udaya Suriya Narayanan @ Kannan vs Unknown on 21 January, 2021
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A(MD)524 of 2009
Udaya Suriya Narayanan @ Kannan ... Appellant
Vs.,
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporaiton,
Bye-pass Road, Madurai. ... Respondent
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and degree order
dated 19.12.2008 in MCOP.No.829 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional
Sub-Court, Madurai.
For Appellant :Mr.C.Godwin
For Respondent :Mr.D.Sivaraman
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been preferred by the claimant being dissatisfied
with the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional
Subordinate Court) Madurai, dated 19.12.2008 passed in MCOP No. 829
of 2006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
2.The appellant as claimant in MCOP No.829 of 2006 sought for
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in an
accident, which took place on 23.12.2005. It is his case before the
tribunal that when he travelled as a pillion rider in a Motor Cycle, which
was proceeding from Madurai to Theni, the bus, owned by the
respondent bearing registration No.TN 59 N 1052 came in a rash and
negligent manner and hit against the Motor Cycle, in which, he sustained
multiple grievous injuries and fracture. Immediately, he was taken to
Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai and after giving first aid, he got
admitted himself in Preethi Hospital, K.K.Nagar, Madurai and he was
treated therein from 23.12.2005 to 08.01.2006 and thereafter, from
08.01.2006 to 10.02.2006, he took treatment in City Hospital and
underwent three surgeries.
3.The claim was resisted by the respondent Transport Corporation
contending that the accident did not take place as stated by the claimant,
but it occurred only due to the negligence of the rider of the motorbike.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
4.It is pertinent to note that the tribunal, after analyzing the
evidence adduced by the parties, held that the driver of the bus was
responsible for the accident. The said finding of the tribunal is not
challenged by the respondent and hence, this Court need not consentrate
on this aspect.
5.With regard to the quantum, this appeal has been preferred by the
claimant seeking enhancement of compensation. The claimant was
examined himself as PW1 and one Murugan, who was working in City
Hospital, Madurai, was examined as PW2 and Dr.Chitambaram as PW3.
The evidence of PW3 and Ex.P16 (wound certificate) shows that the
claimant has suffered permanent disability to an extent of 55%.
However, the tribunal has taken the disability 45%. It is the contention
of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the tribunal has
awarded a meager sum for disability of Rs.45,000/- and hence, it has to
be enhanced.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
6.I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner and hence, for the permanent disability of 45% this Court
awards Rs.90,000/-. Based on Exs.P4, P5, P7 & P9, the tribunal has
awarded Rs.1,20,543/- for the medical expenses.
7.It is evident from the records that the injured was inpatient in the
private hospitals for about 42 days and also he underwent surgeries, but
no amount is granted for the pain and sufferings. Ex.P8 was produced to
show that the claimant paid doctors bill of Rs.31,100/-, but it was
rejected by the tribunal on the sole ground that he did not produce any
voucher. When PW1 has categorically stated that he paid the doctors
bill, it would not be appropriate to reject his case. Considering the nature
of injuries and period of treatment, the award is modified as under:
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
S.No Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. For permanent 45,000 90,000 enhanced
disability
2. For loss of 12,000 15,000 enhanced
income during
treatment
period
3. For medical 1,20,543 1,20,543 confirmed
expenses
4. For pain and - 15,000 awarded
suffering
5. For extra 5,000 5,000 Confirmed
nourishment
6. For Doctors - 31,100
Bills awarded
7. For loss articles 300 300 confirmed
8. For attendant 2,000 5,000
charges enhanced
Total Rs.1,82,843 Rs.2,81,943/- By enhancing a
rounded of to sum of
Rs.2,80,000/- Rs.97,157/-
8.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed,
enhancing the award of the Tribunal from Rs.1,82,843/- to a sum of
Rs.2,80,000/-. The original award amount of the Tribunal shall carry
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and the enhanced award
amount shall be paid along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from
the date of admission of the appeal till the date of realization with
proportionate costs. The respondent shall deposit the enhanced award
amount with interest and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount already
deposited, if any. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the award
amount by filing formal petition before the Tribunal. No costs.
21.01.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
rmk
To
1.The I Additional Sub-Court, Madurai.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No. 524 of 2009
K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J.
rmk
C.M.A(MD)No.524 of 2009
21.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
