Gurusamy v. Radhakrishnan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.09.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURALE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN C.M.A.No.1920 of 2016 Gurusamy .. Appellant/Petitioner /versus/ 1.Radhakrishnan (Notice to R1 may be dispensed with for the set exparte before the Tribunal) 2.Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., 3rd floor, 406, Perundurai Road, Erode 638 011.

.. Respondents/Respondents Prayer:

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No. 503 of 2014 dated 13.06.2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Tiruchengode.

For Appellant : Mr.C.Paraneedharan For R1 : Exparte For R2 : Mr.S.Arunkumar

J U D G M E N T

(This case has been heard through Video Conference) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company.

2. The appellant is the claimant before the Tribunal, Tiruchengode. On 05.08.2014, while he was riding the motorcycle (TVS XL SUPER) bearing registration No.TN 34 P 3177 from Tiruchengode to Veppadai Road, a two wheeler from opposite direction driven rash and negligently dashed his motorcycle. The claimant fell down and got his right hand wrist fractured. Claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation, he preferred claim petition.

3. The Tribunal, on appreciating 11 exhibits relied by the claimant and the witnesses PW.1 to PW.3 and the evidence let in by the respondent through RW.1 and 4 exhibits, has awarded a sum of Rs.96,641/-.

4. The appeal is filed on the ground that the Tribunal ought to have awarded more towards the earning power https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

and pain and suffering, since the injury has caused functional disability to the claimant.

5. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal had failed to note that the claimant has contributed to the accident, when it was his negligence which has resulted in the accident. Without any proof for income, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.18,000/- towards loss of earning. Further the airline fractured in the wrist, the claimant was treated for 3 days and discharged. There is no functional disability or partial permanent disability to the claimant. However, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/-, which is excessive and exorbitant.

6. This Court finds that the Tribunal has taken note of all the exhibits relied by the claimant and the respondent/Insurance Company. Since the Motor Vehicle Inspector report indicates that the rider of the offending vehicle had no driving license, the Tribunal has directed the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company to pay the claimant and recover from the vehicle owner.

7. On holistic consideration of the award, this Court finds that the claimant has been adequately compensated and finds no reason to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Hence the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

8. The Insurance Company is hereby directed to deposit the award amount with 7.5% interest from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation, if so far not deposited. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount after filing appropriate petition. The Insurance Company shall recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rpl To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Tiruchengode.

+1cc to Mr.S.Arunkumar, Advocate SR.No.29429 C.M.A.No.1920 of 2016 PVS(CO) GMY(08/09/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/