Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Mohamed Faarook on 27 March, 2025
C.M.A.(MD)No.966 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
C.M.A.(MD)No.966 of 2023
and
CROS.OBJ(MD)No.16 of 2025
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.13529 of 2023
In C.M.A.(MD)NO.966 of 2023
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation,
Periyamilaguparai,
Trichy. ... Appellant / Respondent
Vs.
Mohamed Faarook ... Respondent / Petitioner
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the award / order dated
04.11.2022 made in M.C.O.P.No.334 of 2014 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal / The learned Special Sub Judge,
Trichirappalli.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Ramaiah
For Respondent : Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
C.M.A.(MD)No.966 of 2023
In CROS.OBJ.(MD)No.16 of 2025
Mohamed Faarook ... Cross Objector / Respondent /
Claimant
Vs.
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation,
Periyamilaguparai,
Trichy. ... Respondent / Appellant /
Respondent
PRAYER: Cross Objection filed under Order 41 Rule 22 of CPC r/2 u/s
173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the award dated
04.11.2022 made in M.C.O.P.No.334 of 2014 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal / The learned Special Sub Judge,
Trichirappalli and allow the cross objection.
For Cross Objector : Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi
For Respondent : Mr.K.Ramaiah
COMMON JUDGMENT
Challenging the order passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal / The learned Special Sub Judge, Trichirappalli, in
M.C.O.P.No.334 of 2014 dated 04.11.2022, the Transport Corporation
has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. The claimant has also filed a
cross objection.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as
per their ranking before the learned Tribunal.
3.The case is one of injury. The petitioner / claimant is the
injured and the respondent is the Transport Corporation. On
16.06.2012, at about 4.00 p.m., the petitioner was driving his two
wheeler bearing registration No.TN 45 AV 8451 from east to west near
Sree Sweet Stall, Thiruverumbur, the respondent corporation's bus
bearing registration No. TN 45 N 2107 which was driven by its driver in
the same direction, i.e., from east to west direction had dashed the
petitioner from behind, causing the accident, as a result of which, the
petitioner sustained multiple injuries, particularly fracture in his leg
and spinal cord and was immediately taken to ABC Hospital, Trichy and
was admitted as in-patient. Further he was referred to CSI Hospital,
Trichy, for higher treatment and then to Anandhagiri Hospital as in-
patient and he incurred a huge medical expenditure to the tune of Rs.
5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only). In this regard, a FIR in crime No.
372 of 2012 was registered under Sections 279 and 337 of the IPC by
the Thiruverumbur Police. Seeking to compensate the injury suffered,
the claimant laid the M.C.O.P.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
4.The learned Tribunal had proceeded to examine three witnesses
on the side of petitioner and marked Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-23, one witness was
examined on the side of the respondent and no documents were
marked. However, the disability certificate of the petitioner was marked
as Exhibit C-1 and medical certificate issued by GH, Trichy, and
concession certificate issued by GH, Trichy, were marked as Exhibit X1
and X2 respectively. On the basis of the arguments made by either
parties, evidence deposed and documents marked, the learned Tribunal
proceeded to pass an award of Rs.3,91,736/- (Rupees Three Lakhs
Ninety One Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Six only). Challenging
the same, the Transport Corporation has preferred this appeal and the
claimant has preferred the cross objection seeking to enhance the
compensation.
5.The learned counsel for the Transport Corporation submitted
that the petitioner was referred to the medical board attached with
JDHS Hospital at Trichirappalli, to ascertain the nature of disability
sustained by the petitioner and the same is marked as Exhibit P-23,
revealing 69% disability. However, the claimant failed to prove that he
had suffered any functional disability. More particularly, he relied upon
the evidence deposed by the injured as PW-1 where he clearly deposed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
that he is able to do his routine work as before accident. In view of the
same, he further made it clear that the disability certificate was not
issued by any of the recognized medical board as required under the
Act, but the same has been issued by a private hospital which could not
have been relied upon by the learned Tribunal.
6.The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the
contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant is not at all correct.
Though the disability certificate issued by the private doctor which is
marked as Exhibit P-23 claims that the petitioner suffered 69%
disability, a careful perusal of Exhibit C1 disability certificate issued by
the Joint Director of Health Service, Trichy, would make it clear that the
injured had suffered 30% disability. Further, he relied upon the
evidence of PW-2 doctor, one doctor Ravi who had made it clear that the
petitioner / claimant cannot effectively function as he had been earlier
to the accident. He pointed out that the spinal cord of the claimant /
injured was damaged. That apart, the fracture sustained by him in his
lower knee was also treated by a surgery by incorporating metal rods
inside his right leg. Hence, he is not able to walk as easily as he had
been able to before the accident. In view of the same, the percentage
which was awarded by the learned Tribunal is less, instead of Rs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) per percentage, the learned
Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.4000/-. Hence, the claimant is
entitled for enhancement and pressed for allowing the cross objection.
7.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant Corporation, the
learned counsel for the claimant and carefully perused the materials
available on record.
8.The learned Tribunal had rightly appreciated the evidence
deposed and only on the basis of the disability certificate issued by the
Medical Board convened by the Joint Director of Health Services which
had certified that the claimant had suffered 30% disability. The Trial
Court has appropriately appreciated the nature of the injuries suffered
and has come to a conclusion that a disability suffered by the claimant
is not one of functional disability and had proceeded to fix Rs.3,000/-
(Rupees Three Thousand only) per percentage of disability while
calculating the compensation in the given facts of the case. Accordingly,
I don't find any demerit in the order passed by the Tribunal and hence,
the appeal fails and the cross objection also fails. Hence, the award of
the learned Tribunal is hereby confirmed. Accordingly, C.M.A(MD)No.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
966 of 2023 and CROS.OBJ.(MD)No.16 of 2023 are dismissed.
9.The appellant Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the
compensation amount as awarded by the learned Tribunal with accrued
interest and costs to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.334 of 2014 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / The learned Special Sub Judge,
Trichirappalli, within a period of eight weeks (8) from the date of receipt
of copy of this judgment, less the amount, if any already deposited. On
such deposit, the claimants / respondents are entitled to get their
shares as per the apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, less the amount,
if any already withdrawn, by making necessary application before the
Tribunal. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
27.03.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
Sml
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
The Sub Judge,
Trichirappalli.
Copy to
The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.,
Sml
27.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 12:43:57 pm )
