AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.—This appeal is preferred by the Appellant-Transport Corporation against the judgment and Decree dated 27.04.2005 made in M.C.O.P No. 768 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court No. I, Tirunelveli.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The deceased-Sulaiman met with motor vehicle accident that took place on 24.08.1995 at about 8.30 a.m. The said deceased was travelling in a van, belonging to the 6th Respondent, bearing Registration No. TN-72- 5424 from Melapalayam to Poovar. The said van was proceeding from North to South direction along the National Highways Road from Palayamkottai to Nagercoil. When the said van was nearing a Petrol Bank at Nanguneri, a bus bearing Registration No. TN-74-N-0390, belonging to the Appellant-Transport Corporation came in a rash and negligent manner and also at high speed and hit the van. The driver of the van and two others died and several others injured. The deceased also sustained grievous injuries in the legs and head and also sustained fracture in the right tibia. Immediately, the deceased was admitted in the Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital and later he was shifted to his residence. He died at his residence on 13.04.1997. The claimants are the wife, two sons and two daughters of the deceased. They filed a claim petition after a period of 7 years from the time of the accident claiming a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation. The Appellant-Transport Corporation, resisted the claim stating that there is no nexus between the injuries and death of the deceased. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:
Who is responsible for the accident?
Whether the claimants are entitled to claim any compensation, if so, how much? and who is liable to pay the compensation?
After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the Appellant-Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs. 74,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the claim petition. The details of the compensation are as under:
Heads Amount Loss of dependency Rs. 51,000/- Funeral expenses Rs. 3,000/- Loss of love and affection Rs. 10,000/- Mental Agony Rs. 10,000/- ------------ Total... Rs. 74,000/- ------------
Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant/Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the death was caused because of the accident, since there is no concrete evidence available on record to show that the death was caused because of the injuries sustained in the accident and also there is neither Post Mortem Report nor the doctor''s evidence. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and hence the same should be set aside.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents 1 to 5/claimants submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and awarded the compensation, which is just, fair and reasonable. He further submitted that the deceased was brought from the hospital to his residence and he was treated in his residence and he died after 1 1/2 years from the time of the accident and hence, the death had occurred only because of the accident. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same should be confirmed.
Heard the counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. On the side of the Respondents 1 to 5/claimants, one Katheeja Bevi, who is the daughter of the deceased was examined as P.W.1 and documents Exs.P1 to P9 were marked. Ex.P1 is the certified copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the certified copy of the Observation Mahazar. Ex.P3 is the certified copy of the Rough Sketch. Ex.P4 is the certified copy of the Motor Vehicle Inspector''s Report. Ex.P5 is the X-ray Report. Ex.P6 is the Death Certificate. Ex.P7 is the Case Sheet. Ex.P8 is the certified copy of the judgment in M.C.O.P. No. ,162 /1998. Ex.P9 is the certified copy of the judgment in M.C.O.P. No. ,43 /1997. On behalf of the Appellant-Transport Corporation one Baskar, who is the conductor of the bus, was examined as R.W.1 and no document was marked to substantiate their claim. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. The finding of the Tribunal is based on valid materials and evidence and it is a question of fact. Hence the same is confirmed.
The date of accident was 24.08.1995 and the date of death was 13.04.1997 and the claim petition was also preferred on 15.02.2002. The nature of the injuries sustained by the deceased are as follows:
2X1X1/2 cm incised wound in central occipital area.
1/2X1/2X1/2 cm incised wound in left knee joint.
5cmX1cmX1cm incised wound in right leg.
Swelling in leg.
Fracture Tibia upper 1/4th.
Ex.P7 is the Case Sheet, which also corroborate with the above injuries. There is only one fracture and others are incised wounds. Immediately, after the accident, the deceased was admitted in the Tirunelveli Medical College Hospital, later he was discharged and the deceased was brought to the home and he died only on 13.04.1997. There is no concrete evidence available on record, to show that the said accident had caused the death and also there is no Post Mortem Report. Learned Counsel for the Appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the Appellant-Transport Corporation must prove that the deceased died due to his old age. He further submitted than when there is no concrete evidence available on record, the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the accident had caused the death. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, this Court is of the view that the compensation has to be awarded only in respect of the injuries. After taking into consideration of the nature of the injuries, certainly she would have incurred some amount towards medical expenditure. There is no dispute that he was admitted in the Triunelveli Medical College Hospital, and later he was brought to home and he took treatment in the home for a period of 1 1/2 years. After considering the same, it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards medical expenses and another sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards attendant charges. He took treatment in the hospital and he was also treated in his house, and therefore, it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards extra nourishment and transport charges. During the period of treatment, certainly he would have lost the income. After considering the same, It would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 5,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period. The Tribunal has fixed the interest rate at 9% p.a. After taking into consideration of the date of accident, date of award and the prevailing rate of interest during that time, the interest fixed by the Tribunal at 9% per annum from the date of petition is reasonable and hence the same is confirmed. Under these circumstances, the compensation of Rs. 74,000/- with interest at 9% p.a, awarded by the Tribunal is set aside and the details of the modified compensation are as under:
Heads Amount Medical expenses Rs.25,000/- Attendant charges Rs. 5,000/- Extra nourishment and transport charges Rs. 5,000/- Loss of income during the treatment period Rs. 5,000/- ----------- Total... Rs.40,000/- -----------
Learned Counsel for the Appellant-Transport Corporation has submitted that the entire award amount with proportionate accrued interest has already been deposited by order of this Court dated 20.04.2006 and the first Respondent, i.e. the wife of the deceased was also permitted to withdraw the half of the award amount with proportionate interest. Under the circumstances, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the modified compensation of Rs. 40,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition, less the amount already withdrawn, on making proper application. The Appellant-Transport Corporation is also permitted to withdraw the balance amount on making proper application.
With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.