Madras High Court
C.Rajendran vs Metropolitan Transport ... on 17 June, 2021
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Date : 17.06.2021
Coram :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2083 of 2014
C.Rajendran .. Appellant
Versus
Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd.,
represented by its Managing Director
Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. .. Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of The Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Order and Decreetal order dated 24.01.2014
made in MACTOP No.2498 of 2011 on the file of the II Judge, Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
For Appellant : M/s.M.Swamikkannu
For Respondents : Mr.K.Moorthy
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant against the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in and by the award dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
24.01.2014 made in MACTOP No.2498 of 2011 on the file of the II Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
2. The case of the appellant/claimant before the Tribunal is that on
01.07.2011 at 1.10p.m, when the appellant/claimant was crossing Anna Salai
from West to East direction at Spencer Junction, the respondent's bus bearing
registration No.TN-01-N-4101 came from North to South direction in Anna
Salai in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the appellant and thereby,
the appellant sustained grievous injuries and hence, the appellant/claimant
claimed a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- as compensation.
3. The claim petition filed by the claimant was resisted by the
respondent/Transport Corporation disputing the manner of accident and age,
occupation and income of the claimant and nature of injuries sustained by the
claimant and also disputed the quantum of compensation sought by the
claimant.
4. In order to prove the claim, on the side of the claimant, the
claimant was examined as PW.1 and Dr.Amarnath R Sowlee was examined as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
PW.2. Exs.P1 to P7 were marked on the side of claimant. On the side of
respondent/Transport Corporation, the driver of the bus was examined as
RW.1, but no documentary evidence was adduced.
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the entire evidence available on
record, came to the conclusion that the accident was due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the respondent
Transport Corporation and passed an award for a sum of Rs.2,51,000/-, under
the following heads:-
Sl.No Head under which the amount is Amount awarded by
awarded the Tribunal(in Rs.)
1 Loss of income for 6 months 60,000
2 Transportation 5,000
3 Extra nourishment 10,000
4 Damage to clothes 1,000
5 Attender Charges, Mental 50,000
Agony, Loss of Amenities of life
and Loss of Expectation of life
6 Pain and suffering 75,000
7 Disability of 25% at the rate of 50,000
Rs.2000/- per disability
Total 2,51,000/-
6. Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
under various heads, the appellant has come out with the present appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that in the
accident, the appellant sustained multifarious fractures in the skull leading to
blood clotting and oozing of blood through ear leading to impairment of
movements in right hand and right leg and and other injuries all over the body.
The learned counsel further contended that P.W.2-Doctor assessed 30% partial
permanent disability to claimant considering the fracture of right temporal
bone with fracture Haemotrn and Left parietal SAH, but the Tribunal had
taken only 25% disability and awarded Rs.50,000/- by taking Rs.2,000/- per
percentage of disability, which is very meagre and atleast Rs.4,000/- is to be
taken per percentage of disability. It is further contended that the appellant
was a two wheeler mechanic and due to the accident, the appellant has been
disabled from continuing his avocation. It is also contended that the Tribunal
has awarded a very meagre sum under the other heads also. Hence, the learned
counsel prayed for enhancement of compensation.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent Transport
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
Corporation would submit that the Tribunal, after considering the nature of
injuries, disability and treatment taken by the claimant and also considering
the age of the claimant, awarded a correct compensation and the same requires
no interference by this Court.
9. The disability suffered by the appellant was fixed at 30% by
PW.2-Doctor. Considering the fact that the PW-2 Doctor, who gave disability
certificate, has not given treatment to the appellant/claimant, the Tribunal has
taken only 25% disability, which in the considered opinion of this Court is
correct. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards disability by fixing
Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability, which in the opinion of this Court is
meagre. Considering the nature of fracture in the right temporal bone with
fracture Haemotrn and Left parietal SAH, this Court is of the view that
Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability is fair and reasonable. Accordingly, the
disability compensation is fixed by this Court at Rs.75,000/- (25% x Rs.3000).
10. Considering the nature of injuries and the disability, this Court is
of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads,
viz., loss of income for 6 months, transportation, extra nourishment, damage to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
clothes, Attender Charges, Mental Agony, Loss of Amenities of life and Loss
of Expectation of life, pain and suffering, are just and reasonable and hence,
the same are hereby confirmed.
11. Except the enhancement of compensation under the head 'disability',
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads remain
unaltered. Accordingly, the award passed by the Tribunal, in comparison with
the amounts now awarded by this Court is tabulated hereunder:
Sl.No Head under which the amount is Amount Amount
awarded awarded by the awarded by this
Tribunal Court (in Rs.)
(in Rs.)
1 Loss of income for 6 months 60,000 60,000
2 Transportation 5,000 5,000
3 Extra nourishment 10,000 10,000
4 Damage to clothes 1,000 1,000
5 Attender Charges, Mental Agony, 50,000 50,000
Loss of Amenities of life and Loss
of Expectation of life
6 Pain and suffering 75,000 75,000
7 Disability of 25% 50,000 75,000
Total 2,51,000 2,76,000
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
12. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed,
enhancing the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal from
Rs.2,51,000/- to Rs.2,76,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs and Seventy Six Thousand
only), which carries interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition
till the date of deposit, except for the default period, if any. No costs in this
CMA.
13. The respondent/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
award amount, as assessed by this Court, together with interest at 7.5% p.a.,
from the date of MCOP till the date of realisation with costs of MCOP, except
for the default period if any, less the amount already deposited, to the credit of
MACTOP No.2498 of 2011 on the file of the II Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Court of Small Causes), Chennai, within a period of four 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 claimant/appellant herein, through NEFT/RTGS, within a
period of two weeks thereafter.
mra 17.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
To
1. The II Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer
Vernacular Records Section
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2083 of 2014
S.KANNAMMAL, J
mra
CMA. No. 2083 of 2014
17.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
