Arumuggam v. F.Ameerthin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 30.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL C.M.A. No.1688 of 2013 Arumugam ..Appellant/Petitioner
Versus
1. F.Ameertheen
2. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., No.12, Ramakrishna Road, Salem.
..Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 15.09.2010 made in MCOP No.249 of 2008 on the file of MACT/Sub Court at Bhavani.
For appellant : Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel For respondents for R2 : Mr.D.Raghu
J U D G M E N T
The appeal is heard through video conferencing.
2. Challenging the dismissal order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Sub Court, Bhavani, in MCOP No.249 of 2008, dated 15.09.2010, the present appeal has been filed by the claimant seeking compensation.
3. It is the case of the appellant/claimant that on 02.10.2007 at about 1 p.m., the claimant was travelling in the second respondent-TransportCorporation Bus, bearing Registration No.TN-30-0468 from Coimbatore to Salem. When the said Bus was nearing Chithode Four Road, the driver drove it in a rash and negligent manner in a speed breaker, as a result of which, he was thrown out of the vehicle and the claimant sustained grievous injuries all over his body. Immediately, the claimant was admitted in Thanvandri Hospital and he took treatment and for further treatment, he was admitted in Erode Trust Hospital.
Thereafter, he continued his treatment in various Private Hospitals.
4. It is the further case of the claimant that he was working as a carpet manufacturer and earning a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month. Hence, he made a claim for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation.
5. The said claim petition was resisted by the Transportation Corporation by filing a counter statement denying the manner of accident as projected by the claimant in the claim petition. They also denied the avocation and income mentioned in the claim petition. Thus, they sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
6. In order to prove the claim on the side of the claimant, the claimant examined himself as PW1, besides examining two other witnesses as PWs.2 & 3 and marked Exs.P1 to P11. On the side of the Transport Corporation, neither any oral evidence nor documentary evidence was adduced.
7. The Tribunal, after analysing the entire evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the claimant's fault. Hence, the Transport Corporation is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimant. Thus, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition.
8. Now, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that while the driver of the Transport Corporation Bus drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, the deceased was thrown out of the vehicle and sustained injuries. The claimant examined himself as PW1 and proved the manner of the accident, however, the Transport Corporation has not examined anyone to disprove the same.
9. It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant that PW3 Doctor examined the claimant and assessed the disability of the claimant at 26%. Considering the injuries suffered by the claimant, at least a sum of Rs.2,000/- may be awarded per percentage of disability under the head "Permanent Disability".
10. Further, considering the fact that the claimant was working as a Carpet Manufacturer and also taking note of the cost of living prevailing at the time of the accident, a sum of Rs.4,000/- may be fixed as monthly income of the claimant. Since the claimant could not attend any work for six months, "Loss of Income" may be calculated for six months. Further, amounts under other conventional heads may also be awarded.
11. The learned counsel for the Transport Corporation made his submissions supporting the findings of the Tribunal.
12. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
13. The contention of the appellant/claimant is that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Transport Corporation Bus, which has some force, since the claimant examined himself as PW1 and proved that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Transport Corporation Bus. Though in the FIR, the claimant had made different version, the same cannot be taken as precedent over the evidence made before the Magistrate. Since the FIR is not an encyclopedia, it is only a primary piece of document to show the cause of the accident and it need not contain the entire facts. Moreover, the Transport Corporation has not disproved the evidence of PW1 by examining anyone on their side.
14. Considering the nature of injuries and disability suffered by the claimant, this Court is of the considered view that 26% disability assessed by the Doctor is to be taken as percentage of disability and it would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. If so awarded, the amount comes to Rs.52,000/- [26 x 2,000]. Thus, a sum of Rs.52,000/- is hereby awarded under the head "Permanent Disability".
15. Considering the nature of work and the cost of living prevalent at the time of the accident, a sum of Rs.4,000/- is fixed as monthly income of the claimant. Since the claimant could not attend any work for a period of 6 months, the "Loss of Income" for the 6 months comes to Rs.24,000/- [4,000 x 6].
16. Considering the duration of treatment undergone by the claimant, it would be just and proper to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the claimant under each of the heads "Pain and Suffering", "Extra Nourishment" and "Attender Charges" and a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head "Transportation Expenses".
17. Considering the injuries suffered by the claimant, it would be proper to award a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head "Loss of Amenities".
18. The claimant produced Medical Bills, which were marked as Exs.P7 & 8, for a sum of Rs.8,828/- and hence, the said amount is awarded under the head "Medical Bills". Thus, the amounts awarded by this Court are tabulated below:
S.
No.
Heads under which amounts are awarded Amount in Rs.
1.
Permanent Disability 52,000 2.
Loss of Income 24,000 3.
Pain and Suffering 10,000 4.
Transportation Expenses 5,000 5.
Extra Nourishment 10,000 6.
Attender Charges 10,000 7.
Loss of Amenities 5,000 8.
Medical Bills as per Exs.P7 & 8 8,828 Total 1,24,828 (rounded off to Rs.1,25,000/-)
19. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is partly allowed. The second respondent/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the amount awarded by this Court, i.e., Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees one lakh and twenty five thousand only) with 7.5% interest p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit of the amount by the second respondent/Transport Corporation, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the same before the Tribunal. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Spl Cell-CJ Conf) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar pvs To
1. The Sub Court at Bhavani/ The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to M/s.Ma.Pa.Thangavel, Advocate, S.R.No.30153 +1cc to M/s.D.Raghu, Advocate, S.R.No.30090 C.M.A. No.1688 of 2013 RP(CO) RGA(18/11/2021)