AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Rajasuria, J.—This appeal is focussed as against the judgment and decree dated 26.12.2005, passed in M.C.O.P. No. 222 of 2002, on
the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal II Additional Sub Court, Nagercoil.
Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant. Despite printing the name of the respondents no one appeared.
The challenge in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is relating to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, vide judgment dated
26.12.2005, to a tune of Rs. 1,92,100/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Two Thousand and One Hundred only) on the following sub-heads:
(i) For Loss of Earning capacity - Rs. 20,000.00
(ii) For Transportation Expenses - Rs. 1,000.00
(iii) For Nutritious Food - Rs. 20,000.00
(iv) For Loss of Cloths - Rs. 1,000.00
(v) For Medical Expenses - Rs. 70,100.00
(vi) For Pain and sufferings - Rs. 20,000.00
(vii) For permanent disability - Rs. 40,000.00
(vii) For Loss of Income - Rs. 20,000.00
--------------
Total - Rs. 1,92,100.00
--------------
The pith and marrow of the grounds of appeal as stood exposited from the memorandum of appeal would run thus:
For one fracture sustained by the claimant in his right leg, the Tribunal assessed the permanent disability at 40% without any rhyme or reason. The
compensation under various sub-heads are also on the higher side.
The point for consideration is as to whether the Tribunal awarded ''just compensation''?
During trial, on the side of the claimants P.W.1 to P.W.2 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.9 were marked and there was no oral or
documentary evidence adduced on the side of the respondents.
Point: The learned Counsel for the appellant/insurance company would submit that the Tribunal simply assessed the permanent disability at 40%
even though there is no clinching evidence in that regard. The perusal of the records would reveal that the medical evidence was adduced by
examining P.W.2 the Doctor, who would narrate that the petitioner sustained 40% permanent disability in view of the mal-united fracture in his
right leg. I am of the considered opinion that there is considerable force in the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant as there
is no basis for assessing the permanent disability at 40% relating to the mal-united of fracture in the right leg of the claimants. The Workmen
Compensation Act under Schedule I, Part II, Serial No. 21 contemplates only 50% permanent disability for the amputation below knee, but here
only for mal-united fracture on the right leg the permanent disability was assessed at 40%. Hence, assessing the permanent disability at 30% would
meet the ends of justice. Taking into consideration the fact that the sustained injury at the age of 25, awarding at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- for each
percent of permanent disability would be appropriate. If accordingly worked out for 30% permanent disability the compensation comes to
Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only).
Towards Medical Expenses the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.70,100/- based on documents, relating to which the appellant has not highlighted
anything so as to disagree with the Tribunal, accordingly the award of Rs.70,100/- towards medical expenses could be confirmed. The Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards Transport Expenses which could be confirmed. Towards damages to clothes Rs.1,000/- was awarded
which could be deleted as it is not based on any sound reasoning. Towards pain and sufferings a sum of Rs.15,000/- could be awarded taking into
account the seriousness of the injury. Towards taking nutritious food a fabulous sum of Rs. 20,000/- was awarded, which by no stretch of
imagination to be taken as reasonable. Hence, the said sum is reduced to Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only). Towards loss of income a
sum of Rs.20,000/- was awarded and towards loss of earning capacity a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was awarded which are not tenable in view of the
decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd. Vs. Ahmed Thambi and Others, . However as the claimant was
Tailor by profession and he might not have been able to carry on with his job for about 3 to 4 months. Hence, a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) could be awarded under that sub-head. As such the compensation awarded is modified as under:
(i) For Loss of Income during
Treatment Period and
convalescent period - Rs. 10,000.00
(ii) For Transportation Expenses - Rs. 1,000.00
(iii) For Nutritious Food - Rs. 3,000.00
(iv) For Medical Expenses - Rs. 70,100.00
(v) For Pain and sufferings - Rs. 15,000.00
(vi) For permanent disability - Rs. 60,000.00
--------------
Total - Rs. 1,59,100.00
--------------
The learned Counsel for the appellant would convincingly argue that the interest awarded was at 12% p.a., but it should only be at 7.5% p.a. in
commensurate with the decisions of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. v. S. Rajapriya and Ors. reported in
2005 (2) TAC 297 SC and in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Charlie and Anr. reported in 2006 (1) TAC 1 (SC). Hence, the interest awarded
is reduced to 7.5% p.a. instead of 12% p.a.
In the result, this appeal is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reduced from Rs.1,92,100/-(Rupees One Lakh
Ninety Two Thousand and One Hundred only) to Rs.1,59,100/- (Rupees One Lakh Fiftynine Thousand and One Hundred only). The rate of the
interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. is reduced to 7.5% p.a. In other aspects the award shall hold good. Consequently, connected M.P.
(MD) No. 1 of 2007 is closed. No costs.