Back
2010 Supreme(Mad) 1248
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE. C.S. KARNAN
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Dharmapuri
Versus
M. Dhanaraj
C.M.A. No. 1640 of 2005
Decided On :25-03-2010
For the Appellant :P. Jagadeeswaran, Advocate.
For the Respondent:V. Kumaravelan, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation for injuries sustained in a motor accident, considering the petitioner's injuries, disability, and loss of income.
Headnote:
Motor Accident - Compensation - Section 279 and 337 of I.P.C - [Section 279, Section 337 of I.P.C] - The court awarded compensation to the petitioner for injuries sustained in a motor accident due to the negligence of the bus driver. The court considered the evidence of the parties and assessed the compensation based on the petitioner's injuries, disability, and loss of income. The court set aside a portion of the compensation awarded for grievous injury, but confirmed the rest of the awards granted by the Tribunal.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was injured in a motor accident due to the negligence of a bus driver. The petitioner sustained multiple injuries and sought compensation for medical expenses, disability, and loss of income.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accident was caused by the negligence of the bus driver and awarded compensation to the petitioner based on the evidence presented.
Issues: The issues considered by the court included responsibility for the accident, entitlement to compensation, and the quantum of compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court assessed the compensation based on the petitioner's injuries, disability, and loss of income. The court set aside a portion of the compensation awarded for grievous injury, but confirmed the rest of the awards granted by the Tribunal.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, confirming the majority of the awards granted by the Tribunal and setting aside a portion of the compensation for grievous injury.
1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/respondent against the Award and Decree, dated 29.09.2004, made in M.C.O.P.No.336 of 2004, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate No.II, Krishnagiri, awarding a compensation of Rs.1,28,134/- with 9% interest per annum, from the date of filing petition till the date of payment of compensation.
2. Aggrieved by the said Award and Decree, the appellant/respondent has filed the above appeal praying to set aside the said award and decree passed by the Tribunal.
3. The short facts of the case are as follows: On 28.04.2003, at about 19.45 hours, the petitioner was walking on the left side of the mud portion of the road in Bangalore to Hosur road, opposite to Sunnambu G.P., at that time the respondents Corporation bus bearing registration No.TN29 N0862 was driven by its driver in a rash and reckless manner, at high speed from Kelamangalam towards Hosur and suddenly hit the petitioner from behind him. As such, the petitioner was thrown down and sustained grievous injuries.
4. Immediately after the said accident, the petitioner was rushed to Government Hospital at Hosur for preliminary treatment, thereafter he was admitted at NIMHANS Hospital, Bangalore, for further treatment. Thereafter he was admitted in Abhaya Hospital, Bangalore as an inpatient for a week. The petitioners right side ribs between 3 to 8 are fractured. Canine teeth upper had fallen and he also sustained multiple injuries all over his body. At the time of the accident the petitioner was 50 years and employed as a Mechanic, his earnings was Rs.3,000/- per month. The Hosur Traffic Police had registered a case against the driver of the State Transport Corporation Bus in Crime No.85/2003 under Section 279 and 337 of I.P.C. The action had happened due to negligence of the respondent State Transport Corporation Bus driver. As such, the respondent State Transport Corporation is liable to pay compensation, a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of payment of compensation.
5. The respondent has filed a counter statement and resisted the compensation. The respondent admitted the accident, which had happened on the Hosur to Bangalore road on 28.04.2003, at about 19.45 hours. But, the accident had not taken place as alleged by the petitioner. Actually the petitioner was walking opposite to the running position of the bus, when all of a sudden, the petitioner crossed the road from left to right, however the driver applied sudden brake to avoid hitting the petitioner. The petitioners own contributory negligence is the cause for the accident, as such the respondent is not liable to pay any compensation. Further, the respondent denies the age, occupation and income of the petitioner. The petitioners claim is an excessive one, rate of interest is also high.
6. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed three issues for the consideration namely:
(i) Who is responsible for the accident?
(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation as claimed?
(iii)What is the quantum of compensation?
7. On the side of the petitioner two witnesses were examined as PW1 and PW2 and five documents were marked as Ex.P1 to P5 namely Ex.P1-FIR; Ex.P2-Wound Certificate; Ex.P3-Discharge Summary; Ex.P4-Medical Receipts and Ex.P5-Disability Certificate. On the side of the respondent one witness was examined as RW1 and no documents were marked.
8. The petitioner was examined as PW1. In his evidence he stated that on 28.04.2003 at about 7.45 p.m. he was walking on the Bangalore-Hosur road on the extreme left side, when the respondents bus coming from Kelamangalam towards Hosur at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the vehicle against him, resulting the petitioner was thrown out. Immediately, he was rushed to the Government Hospital at Hosur. A case was registered against the driver of th
