Madras High Court
M/S.Tamilnadu State Transport ... vs Karpagaraj on 19 October, 2023
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 19.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.8410 of 2021
M/s.Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Rep by its Managing Director,
No.2, Vannarapettai,
Tirunelveli. ... Appellant
.vs.
1.Karpagaraj
2.M/s.Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
No.12, Ramakrishna Road,
Salem-636 007. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173(1) of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to call for the records relating to the order and
decreetal order dated 13.12.2019 passed in M.C.O.P.No.820 of 2015 by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Sub Court), Tirunelveli and
to set aside the same.
For Appellant :Mr.R.Rajamohan
For R1 : Mr.R.Jim
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
For R2 : Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi
JUDGMENT
Challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.820 of 2015 by the
Motor Accidents claims Tribunal/Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli, this
appeal is filed by the Transport Corporation.
2.The appellant mainly challenges this appeal with regard to the
permanent disability fixed at 40.7%. It is claimed that this is excessive.
There is no dispute with regard to the liability to pay the compensation.
3. On 17.04.2015, when the first respondent was riding his motor
cycle bearing Registration No.TN-76-V-3704 from east to west direction
in front of Ilayarasanenthal Primary Health Centre in Kalingapatti to
Kovilpatti Main Road, the bus bearing Registration No.TN-27-N-1507
came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and
dashed against the motor cycle. As a result, he suffered fractures on his
right thigh, right shoulder, left chest and dislocation of right hip and
other injuries. He was treated at Government Hospital, Kovilpatti and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
T.V.M.C.H. Hospital, Tirunelveli. He spent huge money for medical
treatment. He was employed as Auto Driver and earning Rs.
15,000/- per month. After accident, he is not able to work as he was used
to work prior to the accident. Thus, he claimed a compensation of
Rs.20,00,000/-.
4. This claim was resisted by the Transport Corporation by filing
counter stating that the two wheeler rider had alone was responsible for
the accident by coming on the wrong side of the road. Further, the
compensation claimed is excessive.
5. During the course of enquiry, on the side of the appellant, PW.1
to PW.3 were examined and EX.P1 to Ex.P7 were marked. No oral and
documentary evidence was produced on the side of the respondents.
6. On considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal
awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,52,800/-. Challenging the quantum
of compensation, this appeal is filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that
the percentage of disability fixed at 40.7% is too excessive and the same
contributed to the award of excessive compensation.
8. The learned counsel for the claimant/first respondent submitted
that considering the nature of fractures suffered at vital parts of the body,
the percentage of disability assessed is appropriate.
9. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
10. A reading of the order of the learned Special Sub Judge,
Tirunelveli, shows that PW3 Doctor, who issued Disability Certificate,
gave evidence on the basis of the medical treatment records of the first
respondent. As per the medical treatment records, first respondent was
surgically treated for dislocation of right hip bone and for fracture of the
right hip acetabulum. Screw had been fixed. He finds it difficult to sit on
the floor. There is a possibility that the first respondent would suffer
avascular necrosis (death of bone due to loss of blood supply). It is also
seen from his evidence that first respondent suffered fractures on the
right shoulder, left zygoma and left mandible.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
11. Taking into consideration the fracture injuries suffered, the
Doctor assessed the disability at 40.07%. This Court finds that the
assessment of disability at 40.7% for the aforesaid injuries, which
resulted in disablement in performing the day-to-day function, is just and
appropriate. The Tribunal had just awarded Rs.4,000/- per percentage of
disability and awarded total sum of Rs.1,62,800/- under the head of
disability. Apart from this, the Tribunal awarded Rs,5,000/- towards
attendant charges, Rs.30,000 towards pain and sufferings, Rs.25,000/-
towards extra nourishment, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of convenience and
Rs.5,000/- towards transport expenses and in total a sum of Rs.2,52,800/-
has been awarded. This is a just and fair compensation for the disability
suffered by the petitioner and this Court is of the view that the award
passed by learned Special Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli, does not call
for any interference.
12. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index :Yes/No 19.10.2023
Internet :Yes/No
NCC :Yes/No
cp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.
cp
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
(Special Subordinate Judge),
Tirunelveli.
C.M.A(MD)No.892 of 2021
19.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
