The Managing Director vs Govindaraj
2021 Latest Caselaw 5261 Mad

                                                                           C.M.A.No.623 of 2021


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 01.03.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                                 THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                              C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

                    The Managing Director
                    Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                     (Salem) Limited
                    No.12, Ramakrishna Road
                    Salem-7, R.O. at Dharmapuri.                            .. Appellant


                                                       Vs.


                    Govindaraj                                             .. Respondent

                    Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor

                    Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2013

                    made in M.C.O.P.No.2275 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

                    Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Krishnagiri.



                                      For Appellant     : Mr.D.Venkatachalam



                    1/8


http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.623 of 2021




                                                  JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the

appellant/Transport Corporation to set aside the award dated 29.11.2013

made in M.C.O.P.No.2275 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Krishnagiri.

2.The appellant/Transport Corporation is respondent in

M.C.O.P.No.2275 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Special Sub Court, Krishnagiri. The respondent filed the said claim petition

claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained

by him in the accident that took place on 31.10.2008.

3. According to the respondent, on the date of accident i.e., on

31.10.2008 at about 16.00 hours, while he was travelling as a pillion rider

in a motorcycle, which was driven by his friend, on Krishnagiri to Hosur Main

Road, the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation

drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

motorcycle in which the respondent travelled as pillion rider and caused the

accident. In the accident, the respondent sustained grievous

injuries all over the body and therefore, filed the above claim petition claiming

compensation against the appellant/Transport Corporation.

4.The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by

the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and

directed the appellant/Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.4,82,754/- as

compensation to the respondent.

5.Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in

the said award dated 29.11.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.2275 of 2013, the

appellant/Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation contended that the respondent has not produced any valid

document to prove his age and income. The disability assessed by

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

P.W.2/Doctor is without any basis and the same is on the higher side. The

respondent has not proved that he suffered functional disability and lost his

earning capacity. The Tribunal erred in awarding compensation towards loss

of earning capacity by adopting multiplier method. The amount mentioned in

Ex.P8/medical bills has not been corroborated by any other evidence. The

compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses and future

medical expenses are excessive. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under

different heads are also excessive and prayed for setting aside the award of the

Tribunal.

7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation and perused the entire materials available on record.

8.It is the contention of the respondent that in the accident, he suffered

fractures of communited, right femur upper, bilateral mandibular condyle and

grievous injuries all over the body. The respondent has taken treatment in

Sparsh Hospital, Bangalore, as in-patient from 31.10.2008 to 10.11.2008,

underwent surgeries, interlocking nailing and bar placement with guiding

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

elastic were done. The respondent examined himself as P.W.1 and examined

the Doctor as P.W.2 to prove the nature of injuries. P.W.2/Doctor after

examining the respondent, certified that the respondent suffered 40%

disability and issued Ex.P11/Disability certificate. The appellant/Transport

Corporation did not let in any contra evidence to disprove the evidence of

P.W.1, P.W.2/Doctor and the disability certificate issued by P.W.2/Doctor. The

respondent claimed that he was working as an agriculturist as well as Maistry

and was earning a sum of Rs.60,000/- per annum at the time of accident. But

he failed to prove the same. In the absence of any evidence to prove the

income of the respondent, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.40,000/- per annum

as income of the respondent. The accident of the year 2008 and the annual

income fixed by the Tribunal is meagre. The respondent and P.W.2 Doctor

deposed that due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the respondent can

not do the work as he was doing earlier. The Tribunal accepting the evidence

of P.W.1, P.W.2 and the disability suffered by the respondent, adopted

multiplier method while awarding compensation towards loss of earning

capacity. In view of the meagre amount fixed as annual income of the

respondent, the multiplier method adopted by the Tribunal is not interfered

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

with. The Tribunal considering Ex.P8/medical bills, awarded a sum of

Rs.74,954/- towards medical expenses, which is proper. The respondent

suffered fractures, underwent surgeries and nails were fixed. The Tribunal

considering the nature of injuries and surgeries conducted, has awarded a sum

of Rs.40,000/- towards future medical expenses and the same is not excessive.

The Tribunal considering the avocation, disability, nature of injuries and

period of treatment taken by the respondent, awarded compensation under

different heads, which are not excessive warranting interference by this Court.

9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

sum of Rs.4,82,754/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the

respondent, along with interest and costs is confirmed. The

appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire amount

awarded by the Tribunal along with interest and costs, less the amount

already deposited, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the respondent is

permitted to withdraw the entire amount awarded by the Tribunal along with

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. No costs.

01.03.2021

Index : Yes / No kj/gsa

To

1.The Special Subordinate Judge (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Krishnagiri.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Chennai.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

V.M.VELUMANI,J.

Kj/gsa

C.M.A.No.623 of 2021

01.03.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in