JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.274 of 2012, dated 18.09.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.275 of 2012, dated 18.09.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.)

1. C.M.A.(MD)No.719 of 2014 is filed against the award, dated 18.09.2012, in M.C.O.P.No.274 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

2. C.M.A.(MD)No.720 of 2014 is filed against the award, dated 18.09.2012, in M.C.O.P.No.275 of 2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

3. The appellants in both the appeals herein are the claimants, the respondents herein are the respondents in the original claim petitions. Since both the M.C.O.P.Nos.274 of 2012 and 275 of 2012 were filed before the IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli, claiming compensation arising out of the same accident, a common judgment was pronounced by the Tribunal.

4. Brief substance of the petition, in M.C.O.P.No. 274 of 2012, is as follows:

On 26.04.2011, at about 3.30 p.m., when the petitioner/Esakkiammal was travelling as a pillion rider in a new unregistered motor cycle that was ridden by her husband, viz., Muthukumar, a 407 Van bearing Registration No.KL-02-V-6862 that belonged to the first respondent was driven by its Driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the two wheeler and both the petitioner and her husband/Muthukumar sustained injuries. The petitioner claimed a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation.

5. Brief substance of the petition, in M.C.O.P.No. 275 of 2012, is as follows:

The petitioner/Muthukumar was the rider of the two wheeler. He sustained injuries in the accident and he claimed a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation.

6. Brief substance of the counter filed by the second respondent in both the petitions, in M.C.O.P.Nos.274 of 2012 and 275 of 2012, is as follows:

The manner of accident as narrated in the petitions is wrong. The first respondent vehicle Driver drove the vehicle in a careful and cautious manner. It was the petitioner/Muthukumar, who rode the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Van. The petitioner/Muthukumar is liable for contributory negligence. The age, income, profession, injuries, disability and medical expenses are to be proved by the petitioners.

7. A joint Trial was conducted in both the petitions. On the side of the petitioners/claimants, three witnesses were examined and eleven documents were marked. On the side of the second respondent, one witness was examined and two documents were marked.

8. After considering both sides, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.58,000/- for the claimant/Esakkiammal in M.C.O.P.No.274 of 2012. The Tribunal, after deducting 50% towards contributory negligence and has awarded a sum of Rs.40,500/- for the claimant/Muthukumar in M.C.O.P.No.275 of 2012. Against the award, the appellants/claimants have filed these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals for enhancement of compensation.

9. On the side of the appellant, it is stated that the Tribunal failed to consider that a criminal case was registered against the Driver of the Van and the Tribunal ought not to have fixed contributory negligence. The Tribunal failed to consider that the claimants are Folk Dancers and they are not able to continue their profession. The Tribunal ought to have fixed the loss of income by applying multiplier method. The award under various heads is to be enhanced.

10. On the side of the appellant, it is further stated that the appellants sustained fracture, the Driver of the van paid fine before the Criminal Court and there is no necessity to fix