Madras High Court

The Tashildar vs P.Ganesan on 24 November, 2023

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                             Reserved on : 07.09.2023

                                          Pronounced On : 24.11.2023

                                                      CORAM

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

                                            C.M.A(MD)No.127 of 2020


                     1.The Tashildar,
                       Vilathikulam Taluk,
                       Thoothukudi District.

                     2.The District Collector,
                       Collector Office, Korampallam,
                       Tuticorin District.                    : Appellants /Respondents

                                                      Vs.

                     1.P.Ganesan                            : Respondent/3rd Respondent

                     2.M.Ravikumar                          : Respondent/Claimant


                     PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
                     Vehicle Act, 1988, to set aside the award in M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015 on
                     the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate,
                     Tuticorin, dated 29.01.2019.


                                   For Appellant    : Mr.J.John Raja Durai
                                                    Government Advocate (Civil Side)



                     1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                        For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugesan, for R1.
                                                         : Mr.S.Siva Thilakar, for R2.


                                                    JUDGMENT

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order

passed in M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015, dated 29.01.2019 on the file of the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tuticorin.

2.The Appellants/respondents, who were made liable to pay

compensation of Rs.5,34,000/- to the second respondent/claimant for the

disability suffered by him, consequent to an accident occurred on

08.06.2014, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded at by the

Tribunal.

3. The case of the claimants is that the claimant was working as a

Village Assistant in M.Kodankipatti Village at Vilathikulam Taluk; that

on 08.06.2014 at about 03.15 hours, the claimant was travelling in the

second respondent's Bolero Jeep bearing Reg.No.TN-69-G-0572 from

Sankaralingapuram to Vilathikulam along with Thasildar for the purpose

of sand theft ride and when they were proceeding on the Vilathikulam to

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Aruppukottai main road from north to south near Jeyavilas Petrol Bulk,

the third respondent drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and

dashed against the E.B post, which was standing on the western side of

the main road and as a result of which, the claimant has suffered fracture

in the parietal bone and the part of the skull bones, fractures in the 3rd, 4th

7th , 8th and 10th right side ribs and fractures in D5, D6, D7, D8, D9 and

D11 vertebra, contusion in both lungs and also multiple internal and

external injuries all over the body; that he was immediately taken to the

Government Hospital at Vilathikulam and after first aid treatment, he was

taken to Government Medical College Hospital at Thoothukudi and that

after treatment for few hours, he was shifted to A.V.M. Hospital at

Thoothukudi and was given inpatient treatment from 08.06.2014 to

25.06.2014.

4. It is their further case that the claimant was aged 35 years at the

time of accident; that he was working as a Village Assistant in

M.Kodankipatti Village at Vilathikulam Taluk and that he was receiving

monthly salary of Rs.10,104/-. It is their further case that he has been

suffering from head ache, giddines and is unable to do usual work and

that the injuries caused permanent disability.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5. The defence of the appellants is that the claimant, who is a

Government servant has availed medical leave with salary for one month

and after treatment, he has joined duty; that the claimant has been

receiving the same salary what he has received before the accident and as

such, there is no loss of income; that the claimant being a Government

servant will work till his retirement; that the claimant has not sustained

any permanent disability and as such, there is no question of losing of

any earnings; that the injuries suffered by him have already been cured

completely and therefore, the claimant is not entitled to get the amount as

claimed by him and that the compensation claimed is hightly excessive

and exorbitant.

6. During trial, the claimant has examined himself as P.W.1 and the

Medical Officer Thiru.Balakannan as P.W.2 and exhibited 15 documents

as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.15. The respondents have examined the third

respondent driver of the vehicle as R.W.1 and exhibited the copy of

judgment passed in S.T.C.No.500 of 2014 as Ex.R.1.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7. The learned trial Judge, upon considering the evidence both

oral and documentary and on hearing the arguments of both sides, has

passed the impugned order, dated 29.01.2019, fixing the compensation at

Rs.5,34,000/-.

8. It is pertinent to note that the appellants have not challenged the

finding of the Tribunal that the accident was occurred only due to the

rash and negligent driving of the third respondent and the consequent

liability mulcted on them and the challenge is only with respect to the

quantum of compensation.

9. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the

claimant is a Government employee and he has availed medical leave

with salary for one month and after treatment, he joined duty; that the

claimant has been receiving the same salary; that the injuries suffered by

him are not a bar for his promotion, if he is otherwise qualified; that the

claimant being the Government employee is bound to be truthful and

genuine in all aspects towards Government and he shall not make such a

false claim; that the claimant has not produced any evidence to show the

alleged medical treatment and expenses; that the claimant had sustained

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis only few injuries and the same have already been cured; that the

compensation awarded is excessive and without basis and that therefore,

the same is liable to be interfered with.

10. It is evident from Ex.P.11/Discharge summary that the claimant

was admitted in A.V.M.Hospital, Thoothukudi on 08.06.2014 and surgery

under LA, right ICD was done on 09.06.2014 and under GA, excision of

depressed fracture left parietal bone and subtotal evacuation of ICH &

duroplasty were done on 12.06.2014 and that ICD removal was done on

16.06.2014.

11. It is evident from disability certificate that the Medical Board

attached to the Government Thoothukudi Medical College Hospital on

examining him, fixed the disability at 35%. The claimant has summoned

and examined Dr.Balakannan, Member of Medical Board, who examined

the claimant and issued the disability certificate as P.W.2 and he has

reiterated the injuries suffered by the claimant and fixing the disability

at 35%.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

12. It is not in dispute that the claimant was aged 35 years at the

time of accident and he is working as Village Assistant and that he is

getting monthly salary of Rs.10,620/-. Considering the nature of injuries

suffered and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner is a

Government servant, the Tribunal has rightly applied the percentage

method, but the Tribunal has granted Rs.3,000/- per percentage of

disability. Considering the date of accident, this Court is inclined to grant

Rs.4,000/- per percentage of disability and as such, the claimant is

entitled to get Rs.1,40,000/-toward partial permanent disability.

13. The Tribunal, taking note of the fact that the claimant has

availed earned leave for one month, has granted Rs.10,000/- for loss of

income. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- for transportation, extra

nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.1,00,000/- for pain and

sufferings. The Tribunal, taking note of the medical bills under Ex.P.8 to

Ex.P.10, has rightly granted Rs.1,54,000/- towards medical expenses.

14. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants,

the Tribunal without any basis and without assigning any reason, by

simply observing that the claimant has to work for more years, has

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards future damages. The claimant has neither

pleaded nor adduced any evidence in this regard.

15. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants,

the Tribunal has not shown as to how and what basis, the above amount

was awarded. But at the same time, the amount awarded under the heads

of transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges is very low.

Considering the nature of injuries suffered, period of in-patient treatment

and the attending circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant

Rs.20,000/- for transportation; Rs.30,000/- towards extra nourishment

and Rs.15,000/- for attendant charges.

16. Considering the above, this Court decides that the claimant is

entitled to get compensation under the following heads:

Head of compensation Amount awarded Amount confirmed/ by the tribunal modified by this Court Partial permanent disability Rs. 1,05,000/- Rs. 1,40,000/-

                       Loss of income                     Rs.      10,000/- Rs.           10,000/-
                       Transportation     charges;                          Rs.           20,000/-
                       extra nourishment and       Rs.             15,000/- Rs.           30,000/-
                       attendant charges                                    Rs.           15,000/-
                       Pain and sufferings                Rs.    1,00,000/- Rs.        1,00,000/-
                       Future damages                     Rs.    1,50,000/-           -
                       Medical expenses                   Rs.    1,54,000/- Rs.        1,54,000/-
                            Total                         Rs.    5,34,000/-   Rs.      4,69,000/-



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

17. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed

and the compensation amount awarded at Rs.5,34,000/- is reduced to

Rs.4,69,000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum and costs. The second

respondent/District Collector is directed to deposit the modified award

amount, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such

deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount with

accrued interest and costs, less amount already withdrawn, if any, on due

application before the Tribunal. Parties are directed to bear their own

costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.




                                                                                    24.11.20213

                     NCC      : Yes :No
                     Index : Yes : No
                     Internet : Yes : No
                     das
                     To
                     1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal