The main legal point established is the application of the multiplier method for compensation assessment in cases of permanent disability and loss of earning capacity.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 22.06.2010 made in M.C.O.P. No. 1204 of 2008 on the file of the V Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Small Causes Court), Chennai.

1. Claimant is the appellant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned V Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Small Causes Court), Chennai, in M.C.O.P. No. 1204 of 2008, dated 22.06.2010.

2. The short facts that are essential for the disposal of this appeal is that the claim petitioner has preferred claim petition in M.C.O.P. No. 1204 of 2008 before the learned V Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Small Causes Court), Chennai, alleging that on 23.02.2008 at 00.10 hours, he was proceeding as Cleaner in the Swaraj Masda Van bearing Registration No. TN-25-U-6133 along with G.S.T. Road, from North to South Direction and when the said vehicle was nearing Airport Deccan Devil, the same was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner without following the traffic rules and regulations and dashed against another Lorry, which was going ahead. Due to which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The accident had occurred due to breakneck speed and reckless driving of the Swaraj Mazda Van. The driver of the Swaraj Mazda Van is directly responsible for the accident. Therefore, the first respondent herein as owner and second respondent herein as insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly, severally, vicariously and statutorily liable to pay compensation to the claimant. The claim petition was filed by the claimant for a sum of Rs. 10,51,000/- restricted to Rs. 10,00,000/- as compensation.

3. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, the claimant examined himself as PW-1 and Dr. K.J. Mathiazhagan was examined as PW-2 and ten documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.10. On behalf of the respondents before the Tribunal, no witness was examined and no document was marked.

4. The Tribunal, after considering both oral and documentary evidence adduced on the side of the claimant, has come to a conclusion that the accident has taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent (before the Tribunal) and awarded a total sum of Rs. 2,13,500/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit. Having not satisfied with the award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has preferred this appeal before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.

5. The factum of the accident, manner of the accident and negligence on the part of the driver of the first respondent’s vehicle are not in dispute and hence, the same are hereby confirmed.

6. On the point of quantum, both the parties were heard.

7. On a perusal of records, it is seen that as per Ex.P.2 - Discharge Summary, the age of the claimant is 20 years and he was working as Cleaner in Sulaiman Traders in Thiruvannamalai District. As per Ex.P.2 - Discharge Summary, it is seen that the claimant had sustained fracture of both side shaft of femur, fracture of both bones right leg and fracture of both bones left leg and also undergone surgeries for three occasions and closed it nailing for both bone left leg and ORIF for right femur and ORIF with ILAM nailing for fracture of both bones right leg were done to him.

8. PW-2 Dr. K.J. Mathiazhagan, had issued Ex.P.1-Wound Certificate, wherein, it is stated that the claimant had sustained fracture of both side shaft of femur, fracture of both bones right leg and fracture of both bones left leg and he also undergone surgeries for three occasions and closed it nailing for both bone left leg and ORIF for right femur and ORIF with Ilam nailing for fracture of both bones right leg were done to him. PW-2 Doctor has also deposed that the claimant has got a permanent partial disability of