Madras High Court
Mano vs Mari on 5 March, 2024
C.M.A(MD)No.1191 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated: 05.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
C.M.A(MD)No.1191 of 2013
Mano ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.Mari
2.Vinayaga Ramadurai
3.United India Insurance Company Limited,
No.1, Post Office Road,
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli.
4.Balasubramania Durai
5.Iffco Tokiyo General Insurance Company Limited,
No.335/1A, V.V.Complex,
North Byepass Road,
Vannarpettai, Tirunelveli. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer : This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the award and decree, dated
29.12.2011 passed in M.C.O.P.No.627 of 2011 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, F.T.C.No.1,
Tirunelveli.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD)No.1191 of 2013
For Appellant : Mr.T.Selvakumaran
R-1 & R-2 : Batta due
For R-3 : Mr.C.Karthik
R-4 : Dispensed with
For R-5 : Mr.K.R.Shivashankari
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred as against the
order passed in M.C.O.P.No.627 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, F.T.C.No.1, Tirunelveli,
wherein, the appellant herein has filed a petition for claiming
compensation due to the road accident and the Tribunal has only awarded
a sum of Rs.35,000/-. As against the order passed by the Tribunal, the
present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred.
2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties herein after
will be referred to as per their status /ranking in the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The brief facts of the petition before the Tribunal are as
follows:
On 29.03.2011 at about 09.30 P.M., when the petitioner along with
one Mano are proceeding in Yamaha Motorcycle bearing Registration
No.TN 76 X 5292, at the time, in front of Thachanallur Police Station, the
vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 72 K 5686 auto came in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner's motorcycle. Due to
which, he sustained injuries and the accident took place due to the
negligence of the first respondent driver. Thereby, he claimed
compensation.
4. The counter filed by the first respondent are as follows:
The petition is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The
accident was not occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver
of the first respondent. The vehicle was already sold to one Sudalai. On
the date of accident, the first respondent is not the owner. The first
respondent denied the age, income and occupation of the petitioner.
However, the first respondent auto was insured with the third respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed as against the first
respondent.
5. The counter averments filed by the second respondent are as
follows:
The petition is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the
same is liable to be dismissed. The accident took place due to the
negligence on the part of the rider of motorcycle and not by the negligence
of the auto driver. The second respondent vehicle was insured with the
third respondent. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed as against
the second respondent.
6. The counter averments filed by the third respondent are as
follows:
The petition is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the
same is liable to be dismissed. The third respondent denied the age,
income and occupation of the petitioner. The accident took place due to
the negligence on the part of the rider of the two-wheeler and not on the
negligence of auto driver. The driver of auto had no valid license on the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
date of accident and thereby, the third respondent is noway liable to pay
compensation to the petitioner.
7. Before the Tribunal, joint trial was ordered along with
M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011 and on the side of the petitioners, they examined
P.W.1 to P.W.3 and marked Exhibits P.1 to P.9. On the side of the
respondents, D.W.1 to D.W.3 were examined and marked Exhibits R.1 and
R.2.
8. After hearing both the sides, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.35,000/- towards compensation. Aggrieved by the order of the
Tribunal, the petitioner has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for
enhancing the award amount.
9. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant / petitioner
would contend that the petitioner sustained grievous injuries and his
permanent disability is 20%. In order to prove the same, he had examined
the Doctor as P.W.3, who has given disability certificate to the petitioner.
The P.W.3 in his evidence stated that the petitioner sustained disability of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
20%. The Tribunal has only awarded a meagre amount of Rs.35,000/-.
Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be enhanced.
10. The learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent would
contend that the Tribunal has taken a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards partial
permanent disability and in other heads, awarded a reasonable amount and
thereby, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
11. This Court after hearing both sides and upon perusing the
documents including the order of the Tribunal, the point for determination
in this appeal is:
i) Whether the appeal has to be allowed or not?
12. In this case, there is no dispute that the accident took place due
to the negligence on the part of the driver of the first respondent and the
Tribunal also fixed the liability as against the driver of the first respondent
and no appeal was filed by the Insurance Company as against the findings
in respect of the negligence. Therefore, the petitioner has proved the
negligence on the part of the driver of first respondent. The present appeal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
is filed only as against the quantum of the amount. The Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards partial permanent disability, Rs.
1,000/- towards transport expenses and extra nourishment, Rs.5,000/-
towards pain and sufferings. The amount awarded by the Tribunal is only a
meagre amount.
13. This Court considering the date of accident and the nature of
injuries, inclined to award a sum of Rs.2,000/- for 1% of disability. There
is no dispute that P.W.1 was sustained grievous injuries and his disability
is 20%. Therefore, he is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- (i.e.,) Rs.2,000/-
for 1%. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards transport
expenses and extra nourishment. This Court is inclined to award a sum of
Rs.5,000/- towards transport expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards extra
nourishment. The Tribunal has awarded as sum of Rs.5,000/- towards pain
and sufferings. This Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.20,000/-
towards pain and sufferings. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.3,000/- towards medical expenses. This Court is also inclined to award
the same amount. In total, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.73,000/-
rounded off to Rs.75,000/-. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rs.75,000/- towards compensation. In other aspects, the order of the
Tribunal is confirmed.
14. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly
allowed and the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.75,000/- with interest
at the rate of 7.5% per annum for the enhanced amount from the date of
petition till the date of realization of the amount. The third respondent is
directed to deposit the above said amount with interest within a period of
two months from the date of this judgment. In other aspects, the order of
the Tribunal is confirmed. After deposit of the amount, the petitioner is at
liberty to withdraw the said amount by filing appropriate application. The
petitioner is not entitled to interest for the default period, if any. There
shall be no order as to costs.
05.03.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
BTR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Judge,
F.T.C.No.1,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Record Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P. DHANABAL, J.
BTR
05.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
