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 11.07.2005 made in M.C.O.P. No. 1888 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, IV Additional Sub Court, Madurai.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The injured-claimant Parvathi met with motor traffic accident on 10.04.2002 at about 21.00hours. The said injured was travelling in the bus belonging to the Appellant-Transport Corporation bearing Registration No. TN-59-N-0668. The said bus was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and also at high speed and due to the same, it went out of its control and hit a road side tree. Due to the said impact, the injuredclaimant sustained grievous injuries all over the body. She claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation before the Tribunal. The Appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim.
On pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
On whose negligence, the accident had occurred?
Whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation, if so how much? and from whom?
After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred 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. 41,000/- with interest 7.5%p.a. from the date of claim petition. The details of the compensation are as under:
For transport expenses Rs. 1,000/- For extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- For medical expenses Rs. 7,500/- For pain and suffering Rs. 7,500/- For loss due to 15; disability Rs. 15,000/- For loss of earning during the treatment period Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 41,000/-
Aggrieved by that award, the Appellant-Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant/Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and contended that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant and also without any basis and justification. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent/claimant has submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence on record and came to the right conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. It is a question of fact and also it is based on valid materials and evidence. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed.
Heard the counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. On the side of the claimant, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and documents Exs.P.1 to P.7 were marked. P.W.1 is the injured- claimant. P.W.2 is Dr. Jeyabalachandran. EX.P.1 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the O.P.slip. Ex.P.3 is the bill for Scan. Ex.P.4 is the Scan film. Ex.P.5 is the Disability Certificate. Ex.P.6 is the Case Sheet. Ex.P.7 is the Scan Report. On behalf of the Appellant-Transport Corporation R.W.1-Kannan, the driver of the bus was examined 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 belonging to the Appellant-Transport Corporation. It is a question of fact and it is based on valid materials and evidence. Therefore, the same is confirmed.
The injured-claimant was 40 years old at the time of accident. She was an agricultural coolie and was earning a sum of Rs. 3,000/-p.m. In the evidence of P.W.1, it is stated that only the driver of the bus caused the accident and the driver was also charge-sheeted by Checkanurani Police Station in Cr. No. 107 of 2002 under Sections 279, 337 of I.P.C. Due to the accident, the injured-claimant sustained multiple injuries all over the body, right side ear was reputed and she also sustained a head injury. Immediately after the accident, the injured-claimant was admitted in the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai and then admitted in the Dr. K.S. Viswanathan Hospital. She took treatment as inpatient from 10.04.2002 to 16.04.2002 in the Government Rajaji Hospital and from 17.04.2002 to 19.05.2002 in Dr. K.S. Viswanathan Hospital, Madurai. Due to the injuries, her hearing power has been reduced and she suffers from head-ache and also loss of memory and she is unable to do the work as before. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards transport charges, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of earning during the period of treatment and a sum of Rs. 5,000/-towards extra nourishment. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under these heads are very reasonable and hence, they are confirmed. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 7,500/- towards medical expenses. There is no dispute that the injured-claimant has taken treatment in the Government Hospital as well as in the private hospital. Hence, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under this head is very reasonable and hence, the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs. 7,500/- towards pain and suffering, which is very reasonable and hence, the same is confirmed. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards the loss due to 15% disability. P.W.2 is the doctor who examined the injured- claimant and determined the disability at 29%. Ex.P.5 is the Disability Certificate. The doctor in his evidence, has stated that there is a grievous head injury and the hearing power of the claimant was reduced and she is also suffering from loss of memory. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has reduced the disability to 15% and awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards loss due to 15% disability. Normally the Courts award a sum of Rs. 1,000/- to R.2,000/- per percentage of disability. The Tribunal has correctly fixed a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per percentage of disability and awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards loss due to 15% disability. It is also very reasonable and hence, the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. After taking into consideration of the date of accident, date of award and prevailing rate of interest during that period, the interest rate awarded by the Tribunal at 7.5%p.a. from the date of petition, is reasonable and hence the same is confirmed.
The findings given by the Tribunal are based on valid materials and evidence and I do not find any error or illegality in the order of the Tribunal so as to warrant interference. It is a question of fact. It is not a perverse order. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and hence the same is confirmed.
In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is devoid of merits and hence it is dismissed. No costs.