SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3563

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.K. SASIDHARAN, R. SUBRAMANIAN, JJ.
SATHIYASEKAR - Appellant
Versus
DURAISAMY - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 717, 718 of 2016
Decided on : 08-10-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
R. Poornima, Adv., A.P. Sathyamoorthy, Adv., D. Krishnamoorthy, Adv., D. Venkatachalam, Adv.

The court upheld the apportionment of negligence and enhanced the compensation for loss of earning power and future medical treatment based on the impact of the accident on the claimant's future prospects.

Headnote:

Motor Accident - Compensation - MCOP Nos. 31 and 32 of 2012 - Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 166, 168, 171 - The court discussed the apportionment of negligence at 60:40, assessment of disability, loss of earning power, and future medical expenses under various heads. The court upheld the apportionment of negligence and enhanced the compensation for loss of earning power and future medical treatment.

Fact of the Case:

The claimants sought compensation for injuries sustained in a motor accident. The Tribunal apportioned negligence at 60:40 and awarded compensation under various heads.

Finding of the Court:

The court upheld the apportionment of negligence and enhanced the compensation for loss of earning power and future medical treatment for one claimant, while dismissing the appeal for the other claimant.

Issues: Apportionment of negligence, assessment of disability, loss of earning power, and future medical expenses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the apportionment of negligence and enhanced the compensation for loss of earning power and future medical treatment based on the nature of injuries and impact on future prospects.

Final Decision: One appeal was partly allowed, and the compensation was enhanced to Rs. 35,00,000 with interest, while the other appeal was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

R. SUBRAMANIAN, J.

1. Both these appeals are at the instance of the injured claimants who sought for a compensation of Rs. 40,00,000/- in M.C.O.P.No.31 of 2012 (CMA No.717 of 2016) and Rs. 10,80,000/- in M.C.O.P.No.32 of 2012 (CMA No.718 of 2016) on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Salem.

2. It is seen that the said Original petitions namely, MCOP Nos. 31 and 32 of 2012 were transferred to the file of the Special Sub-Court No.I, which was constituted as Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and renumbered as MCOP No.163 of 2012 and MCOP.No.164 of 2012.

3. The case of the claimants in both the original petitions is as follows:

The claimants were travelling as pillion riders in Hero Honda Motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN-54-Z-8024 driven by one Guru and as they were crossing the National Highway road from South to North near Sarvai Bus stop, the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation bearing Registration No.TN-30-N-0450 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner coming from East to West dashed against the two-wheeler, resulting in grievous injuries to both the claimants. The claimant in M.C.O.P.No.163 of 2012 suffered severe skull injuries and the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.164 of 2012 suffered minor injuries. Terming, the rash and negligent driving on the part of the Bus driver as the cause for the accident, the claimants sought for compensation as aforesaid.

4. According to the claimants, the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.163 of 2012 suffered grievous injuries in the skull resulting in loss of eye sight in the left eye. It was also contended that he has taken treatment as an inpatient at Manipal Hospital, Salem from 22.05.2010 to 07.07.2010. He was admitted to National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences at Bangalore on 07.07.2010 from where he was discharged on 08.07.2010. Again he was admitted to Apollo Hospital, Chennai on 09.07.2010 and three surgeries were performed on him eventually he was discharged on 31.07.2010. Claiming that he was a third year Engineering student and he was forced to discontinue his education because of the accident, the claimant would contend that he has suffered a 100% disability.

5. The Transport Corporation resisted the claim petition contending that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the two-wheeler who crossed the road in front of a parked bus, resulting in the accident. The Transport Corporation would contend that the bus driver was not responsible for the accident and hence, it is not liable to pay the compensation. The age and educational qualification were denied by the Corporation.

6. The Tribunal, which heard the original petition, based on the First Information Report and the evidence of the rider who was examined as PW5, concluded that both the vehicles have contributed to the accident and apportioned the negligence at 60:40. The Tribunal assessed the disability caused to the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.163 of 2012 at 70%. The notional income of the injured claimant was taken at Rs. 7,500/-, therefore, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 11,34,000/- (7,500/- x 12 x 18 x 70/100) towards loss of earning power. The Tribunal awarded the following amounts under various heads is as follows:

S. No.

Particulars

Amount

1.

Pain and Suffering

Rs. 1,00,000/-

2.

For shock and mental agony

Rs. 50,000/-

3.

Food and extra-nourishment

Rs. 25,000/-

4.

For Medical expenses including transport

Rs.12,50,000/-

5.

For loss of personal belongings

Rs. 1,000/-

6.

For loss of earning power

Rs.11,34,000/-

7.

For loss of amenities

Rs. 2,00,000/-

8.

For loss of marriage prospects

Rs. 5,00,000/-

9.

For future treatment skull cover surgery

Rs. 1,00,000/-

10.

Total

Rs.33,60,000/-

In view of the fact that the Tribunal had apportioned the ne














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top