P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, J.@mdashThe appeal is preferred by the appellant-Transport corporation against the award dated 15.09.2003 made in M.C.O.P No. 723 of 1998 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Court II, Additional District Judge, Kancheeuram.
2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
One injured Alagesan met with motor vehicle traffic accident on 10.09.1998 at about 06.00 A.M. While the injured was walking on the extreme left side of the Thirukalikundram to Sadras road, a bus bearing registration No. TN-57-0717, Route No. 108 from Kalpakkan to Madras, belonging to the appellant transport corporation came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the injured. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained fracture and grievous injuries all over the body. He claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation. The appellant transport corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whose negligence is caused the accident?
2. What is the compensation, the claimant is entitled to?
3. What is the other relief?
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 compensation of Rs. 71,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim and the details of the same are as under:
_____________________________________________________ Nutrition and medical expenses = Rs. 10,000/- Pain and suffering = Rs. 5,000/- Loss of earning during treatment period = Rs. 3,000/- Loss of income = Rs. 3,000/- Loss due to 50% disability = Rs. 50,000/- _____________________________________________________ Total = Rs. 71,000/- _____________________________________________________
Aggrieved by that award, the appellant transport corporation has filed the present appeal.
3. The Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant transport corporation questioned only the quantum of the award and vehemently contended that the award passed by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant and also without any basis and justification. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same should be set aside.
4. The Learned Counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation is based on valid materials and evidence. It is a question of fact and it is not a perverse order. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same should be confirmed.
5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P3 were marked. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 is Dr. Anbazhagan. Ex.P1 dated 10.09.1998 is the copy of the FIR. Ex.P2 dated 10.09.1998 discharge summary, Ex.P3 is the disability certificate were marked. On the side of the appellant transport corporation, R.W.1 one Arumugam who is the driver of the transport corporation bus was examined. Ex.R1 dated 03.10.2000 Judgment copy. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus and awarded compensation. It is a question of fact. The finding is based on valid materials and evidence and therefore, the same is confirmed.
6. At the time of the accident, the claimant was aged about 65 years. P.W.1 is the claimant. In his evidence, it is stated that he was working as a Watchman in Kavery Resorts, Mamallapuram and further stated that only the driver of the bus caused the accident and the driver was also charge sheeted by E-2 Police Station, Thirukalikumdram in Cr. No. 1059/98 under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC. P.W.2 is Dr. Anbazhagan. In his evidence, it is stated that due to the accident, the claimant sustained injuries and left hand wrist and fingers fractured and he is unable to use the fingers freely. He examined the claimant and determined the disability at 50%. Ex.P3 is the disability certificate. In his evidence, it is further stated that due to the accident, the claimant is unable to do work as before. Ex.P2 is the discharge summary given by Chengalpet Government Hospital in which, it is stated that the claimant is unable to move his fingers freely and he was taken treatment for 5 days as inpatient in the said hospital. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for loss due to 50% disability. Normally Courts award a sum of Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 2000/- per percentage of disability. After taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of injury, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per percentage of disability. Therefore, the Tribunal correctly awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for loss due to 50% disability and the same is confirmed. There is no other material was produced by the Counsel for appellant to take a contrary view of the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 10,000/- for nutrition and medical expenses. As per Ex.P2 discharge summary, he was taken treatment in Government Hospital, Chengalpet, for a period of 5 days and taken better treatment in other hospitals. Taking into consideration of the same, the award amount of Rs. 10,000/- is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards pain and suffering. After taking into consideration of the nature of injuries and fracture, the award amount of Rs. 5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 3,000/- for loss of income. After relying on Ex.P2 and he was taken treatment in various hospitals for better treatment, the Tribunal correctly awarded a sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards loss of income which is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a further sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards loss of earning during treatment period. The said award is unwarranted and therefore the same is deleted. The Tribunal also awarded rate of interest @ 9%. After taking into consideration of the date of accident, date of award and the prevailing rate of interest during that period, the interest rate awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The modified amount of the compensation are as under:
______________________________________________________________
Nutrition and medical expenses = Rs. 10,000/-
Pain and suffering = Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of income = Rs. 3,000/-
Loss due to 50% disability = Rs. 50,000/-
______________________________________________________________
Total = Rs. 68,000/-
______________________________________________________________
7. In the result, the claimant is entitled to modified compensation of Rs. 68,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim as against Rs. 71,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Learned Counsel for the appellant transport corporation stated that they have deposited the entire award amount by the Court order dated 11.11.2005. Under these circumstances, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified compensation of Rs. 68,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum, 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.
8. With the above modifications, the appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
