Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Govindaraj on 1 March, 2021
C.M.A.No.619 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.619 of 2021
The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Limited, Bharathipuram
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 06.09.2013
made in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Additional Special Court, Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : Mr.D.Venkatachalam
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the
appellant/Transport Corporation to set aside the award dated 06.09.2013
made in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
Tribunal, Additional Special Court, Krishnagiri.
2.The appellant/Transport Corporation is respondent in M.C.O.P.No.79
of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Special
Court, Krishnagiri. The respondent filed the said claim petition claiming a
sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the
accident that took place on 29.10.2008.
3. According to the respondent, on the date of accident i.e., on
29.10.2008 at about 10.50 a.m., while he was travelling as a pillion rider in
a two wheeler, which was driven by one Sakthivel, towards Sajjalpatti, near
Kelamangalam diversion road, the driver of the bus belonging to the
appellant/Transport Corporation drove the same in a rash and negligent
manner, hit against the 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.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
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.5,14,000/- as
compensation to the respondent.
5.Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in
the said award dated 06.09.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2010, 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. In the absence of any document, the
monthly income fixed by the Tribunal 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 amounts awarded by the
Tribunal under different heads are excessive and prayed for setting aside the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
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 right leg tibia, ulna, right wrist deformity and grievous injuries all
over the body. The respondent has taken treatment in the hospital as in-patient
and underwent surgery. 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 50%
disability and issued Ex.P5/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. Due
to the injuries sustained in the accident, the respondent could not do the work
as he was doing earlier. The respondent was aged 21 years, he was working as
an loading and unloading coolie and was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per
month at the time of accident. In the absence of any material evidence to
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
prove the avocation and income of the respondent, the Tribunal fixed a sum of
Rs.4,500/- per month as notional income of the respondent. The accident is of
the year 2008 and the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is meagre. The
Tribunal accepting the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2 and the disability suffered by
the respondent, adopted multiplier method and awarded compensation
towards loss of earning capacity. In view of the meagre amount fixed as
monthly income of the respondent, the multiplier method adopted by the
Tribunal is not interfered with. 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.5,14,000/- 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
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
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
interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. No costs.
01.03.2021
Index : Yes / No
kj/gsa
To
1.The Additional Special Judge
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal)
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Chennai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI,J.
Kj/gsa
C.M.A.No.619 of 2021
01.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
