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 02.03.2006 made in M.C.O.P. No. 19 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional Sub Court, Dindigul.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The injured-claimant Rajagopal met with motor traffic accident on 01.01.2003 at about 6.00a.m. The said injured-claimant was travelling as a passenger in a bus belonging to the Appellant-Transport Corporation bearing Registration No. TN-45-N-1354 from South to North direction from Dindigul to Trichy. The said bus was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and also at high speed. Due to the same, it hit against an Ambassador car bearing Registration No. TN-45-H-3757 coming from the opposite direction. Due to the said impact, the injured-claimant sustained grievous injuries all over the body and also lost his four teeth. He claimed a sum of Rs. 50,000/-as compensation before the Tribunal. The Appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings, the Tribunal has
Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Appellant-Transport Corporation or the driver of the Ambassador car?
Whether the claimant is entitled for compensation?If so, what is the amount and from whom?
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. 40,000/-with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under:
For loss due to 31% disability Rs. 31,000/-
For fixing artificial teeth Rs. 9,000/-
(denture) ------------- Total Rs. 40,000/-
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 vehemently contended that there is no concrete evidence on record to show that the injured-claimant sustained 31% disability due to the accident and the Tribunal has wrongly awarded a sum of Rs. 31,000/-for loss due to 31% disability. He further submitted 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 P.W.2 were examined and documents Exs.P.1 to P.5 were marked. P.W.1 is the injured claimant. P.W.2 is Dr. Gopi Ananthan. Ex.P.1 is the certified copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the certified copy of the Charge Sheet. Ex.P.3 is the O.P.slip of the injured-claimant. Ex.P.4 is the Certificate for having taken treatment. Ex.P.5 is the Disability Certificate. On the side of the Appellant-Transport Corporation, R.W.1, Arumugam, the conductor of the bus was examined and no document was marked before the Tribunal 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 59 years old at the time of the accident. In the evidence of P.W.1, it is stated that he was a retired Personal Assistant to the District Judge, Dindigul and he was receiving a sum of Rs. 4,500/-as his monthly pension at the time of accident. It is further stated that only the driver of the bus caused the accident and the driver was charge-sheeted by the Vadamadurai Police Station in Cr. No. 1/2003 under Sections 279, 337 and 304 of I.P.C. Due to the accident, the injured-claimant sustained grievous injuries all over the body and also lost his teeth and due to the loss of teeth, there is disfigurement in his face. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted in the Government Hospital, Dindigul and later he was admitted in the Raja Rajeswari Hospital, Dindigul and he was treated as inpatient for a period of three days. Due to the loss of teeth, he is not able to chew the food and also unable to speak as before. Ex.P.4 is the Treatment Record. Ex.P.5 is the Disability Certificate. In Ex.P.4-the Treatment Record, it is stated that the injuries are grievous in nature. In Ex.P.5-the Disability Certificate, the break up of 31% disability is given as follows:
6% disability towards disfigurement
10% disability towards difficulty in speech
15% disability towards loss of teeth.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that 31% disability fixed by the doctor was only after a period of two years from the date of accident. Considering the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Appellant and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the disabilities in respect of the difficulty in speech and disfigurement cannot be taken into account and only 15% disability fixed towards loss of teeth alone has to be taken. Normally the Courts award a sum of Rs. 1,000/-to Rs. 2,000/-for each percentage of disability. After considering the nature of disability and the evidence of the doctor, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 15,000/-towards loss due to 15% disability as against the sum of Rs. 31,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. The amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs. 9,000/-for fixing the artificial teeth (denture) is very reasonable and hence, the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards pain and suffering, transport expenses and also extra nourishment. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is reasonable to award a consolidated sum of Rs. 3,000/-towards these heads. The Tribunal has also awarded an interest of 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. After taking note of the date of accident, and the date of award and also the prevailing rate of interest during the relevant period, the interest rate fixed by the Tribunal at 7.5p.a. is reasonable and hence, the same is confirmed.
The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:
For loss due to 15% disability Rs. 15,000/- For fixing artificial teeth (denture) Rs. 9,000/- For pain and suffering, for transport charges and for extra nourishment Rs. 3,000/-
Rs. 27,000/-
The claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs. 27,000/-with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition as against the sum of Rs. 40,000/-as awarded by the Tribunal.
It is stated that the Appellant-Transport Corporation had already deposited the entire award amount with accrued interest and the claimant was also permitted to withdraw 50% of the award amount with proportionate interest. Under these circumstances, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified compensation of Rs. 27,000/-with 7.5%p.a. interest from the date of petition, less the amount already withdrawn, on making proper application. The Appellant Transport Corporation is also permitted to
With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.