Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Murugesan on 11 March, 2021
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A. No.751 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
No.12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem 7. .. Appellant
Vs.
Murugesan .. Respondent
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2014, made
in M.C.O.P. No.15 of 2011, on the file of the Additional District Court,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Dharmapuri.
For Appellant : Mr. D.Venkatachalam
___
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(The matter is heard through Video Conferencing/Hybrid mode)
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-
Transport Corporation challenging the quantum of compensation granted by
the Tribunal in the award dated 08.01.2014, made in M.C.O.P. No.15 of 2011,
on the file of the Additional District Court, (Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal), Dharmapuri.
2.The appellant is the respondent in M.C.O.P. No.15 of 2011, on the
file of the Additional District Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Dharmapuri. The respondent/claimant 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 02.09.2008.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
3.According to the respondent, on the date of accident, when he was
riding his Motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-29-F-2877, near
Santhanoor diversion, the driver of a Bus bearing Registration No.TN-30-N-
0648 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation drove the Bus from
Krishnagiri to Salem, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the
respondent and caused the accident. The accident occurred only due to rash
and negligent driving by driver of the Bus. In the accident, the respondent
sustained injury on his right arm, shoulder, head and fracture of right leg and
hence, filed claim petition claiming compensation against the appellant as
owner of the Bus involved in the accident. The Tribunal considering the
pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred
due to rash and negligent driving by both the driver of the Bus belonging to
the appellant-Transport Corporation as well as the respondent/rider of the
Motorcycle and fixed 50% negligence on both the driver of the Bus as well as
the respondent/rider of the Motorcycle. The Tribunal awarded a sum of
Rs.2,12,936/- as compensation and directed the appellant to pay a sum of
Rs.1,06,468/-, being 50% of the compensation to the respondent.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
4.Questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in
the award dated 08.01.2014, made in M.C.O.P. No.15 of 2011, the appellant –
Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation contended that the respondent failed to prove his age, avocation
and income by oral and documentary evidence. The Tribunal ought not to
have taken the percentage of disability as 25%, which is on the higher side.
The Tribunal erred in adopting multiplier method, relying on the evidence of
P.W.2 Doctor, to award compensation towards loss of future earning capacity
to the respondent, when the respondent failed to prove that the disability
sustained affected his normal work and there is total functional disability.
The injuries sustained by the respondent are simple in nature. The amount
awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is excessive. The total
amount granted by the Tribunal is excessive and prayed for reducing the
compensation.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport
Corporation and perused the materials available on record.
7.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of the
respondent that in the accident, he sustained injuries on his right hand, leg
and has undergone surgery. The respondent has taken treatment as in-patient
at Government Medical College Hospital from 02.09.2008 to 04.09.2008 and
at St.John Medical College Hospital, Bangalore from 05.09.2008 to
24.09.2008. He filed Ex.P4 – discharge summary to prove the same. P.W.2
Doctor examined the respondent and certified that the respondent suffered
40% disability for the fracture of both tibia. The appellant has not let in any
evidence to disprove the evidence of PW2 – Doctor and Ex.P8, disability
certificate. In view of the same, the Tribunal considering the avocation of
respondent as Agricultural Coolie and nature of injuries and fracture, fixed
the percentage of disability as 25% for whole body and adopted multiplier
method for awarding compensation. There is no error in the said finding.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
8. It is the contention of the respondent that at the time of accident, he
was earning a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month as Agricultural Coolie. He did
not file any document to prove the same. In the absence of any material
evidence with regard to avocation and income, the Tribunal fixed a sum of
Rs.3,000/- per month as notional income of the respondent, granted 30%
enhancement granted towards future prospects and fixed Rs.3900/- per month
as notional income of the respondent. The accident is of the year 2008. The
sum of Rs.3900/- per month fixed as notional income is not excessive. The
respondent was aged 41 years at the time of accident. Following the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 SC Supreme
Court [Sarla Verma & others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another],
the Tribunal applied multiplier '14' and awarded compensation towards future
loss of income for 25% disability. The Tribunal failed to award any amount
for attendant charges. The sum of Rs.29,136/- awarded by the Tribunal
towards transportation based on Ex.P7-medical bills, Rs.10,000/- towards
pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- each towards extra nourishment and
transportation are not excessive, warranting interference by this Court.
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the
amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,12,936/- 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
sum of Rs.1,06,468/-, being 50% of the award amount along with interest and
costs, less the amount already 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.15 of 2011. 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.
11.03.2021
Index : Yes/No
gsa
To
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.751 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
1.The Additional District Judge,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Dharmapuri.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
C.M.A. No.751 of 2021
11.03.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
