Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. THARANI, J.
Kanagammal – Appellant
Versus
Shree Vedika and Others – Respondents
C.M.A. (MD) No. 533 of 2014
Decided On : 11-11-2021
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 - Motor Accident Claims - Claiming compensation for injuries sustained by claimant - Functional disability Claimant and the respondents herein are the respondents in claim petition - Appellant herein has filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P. claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by claimant compensation - Petitioner was travelling in a bus bearing Registration that belong to the first respondent insured with second respondent along the Tenkasi - Madurai Highways - Driver of the bus drove bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against rear side of lorry - Third respondent insured with the fourth respondent - Petitioner sustained injuries and took treatment at Government Hospital and then she was admitted in Government Hospital, Tenkasi and he took treatment as in patient for a period of ten days - Manner of accident as narrated in petition is wrong - First respondent is not responsible for the accident - Accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the third respondent lorry driver - Petitioner has to prove her age, profession, income, manner of the accident, injuries, treatment particulars and expenses for treatment claim is excessive - first respondent bus driver is responsible for the accident. FIR was registered only against the bus driver - Petitioner has to prove age, income, profession, manner of the accident, injuries, treatment particulars and the expenses for the treatment - Held, Discharge summary and the case sheet were marked as Ex.P5 and Ex.P15. There is no evidence on the side of the appellant to prove that the appellant has lost her carrier due to the accident - Job of appellant as stated in the claim petition is Clerk. There cannot be any functional disability restraining the appellant to continue the same work. decided that for 35% partial permanent disability, the appellant is entitled - treatment and for the period of rehabilitation, the appellant is entitled towards temporary loss of income - appellant is entitled to a sum compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization - Amount has to be deposited within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the award amount with interest after deducting any amount received by her earlier - Claimant is not entitled for interest for the default period, if there is any - Appeal is partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
R. THARANI, J.
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the award amount in M.C.O.P. No. 351 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate Court), Tirunelveli dated 20.12.2013.
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the award passed in M.C.O.P. No. 351 of 2012 dated 20.12.2013, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli.
2. The appellant herein is the claimant and the respondents herein are the respondents in the claim petition. The appellant herein has filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P. No. 351 of 2012, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant, in an accident that took place on 31.05.2012. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,00,222/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Two Hundred and Twenty Two only) as compensation. Against which, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
3. Brief substance of the claim petition in M.C.O.P. No. 351 of 2012 is as follows:
4. Brief substance of the counter filed by the second respondent therein is as follows:
5. Brief substance of the counter filed by the fourth respondent therein is as follows:
6. The respondents 1 and 3 were set ex-parte. On the side of the claimant, three witnesses were examined and 15 documents were marked. On the side of the respondents, no witnesses was examined and no document was marked. After trial, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,00,222/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Two Hundred and Twenty Two only) as compensation to be paid by the second respondent therein. Against which, the appellant has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of the award.
7. On the side of the appellant, it is stated that the Tribunal ought to have adopted multiplier method for calculating the loss of income. Though the disability is 45% the functional disability is 100%. The Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) towards loss of amenities and Rs. 1,05,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Five Thousand only) towards permanent disability and the Tribunal awarded Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards pain and suffering, Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousa
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
