The assessment of disability, nature of injuries, and evidence of the claimant's income are crucial factors in determining compensation in motor vehicle accident claims.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 07.04.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.423 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Coimbatore.)

V.M.Velumani, J.

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company against the judgment and decree dated 07.04.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.423 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Coimbatore.

2. The appellant/Insurance Company is the 2nd respondent in M.C.O.P.No.423 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Coimbatore. The 1st respondent filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.45,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 05.10.2015.

3. According to the 1st respondent, on the date of accident i.e., on 05.10.2015 at about 23.00 hours, while he was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 39 BQ 5529 on Tiruppur – Perumallur Main Road from South to North direction, near Raba KRR Honda show room, the 2nd respondent, the driver-cum-owner of the Auto Rickshaw bearing Registration No.TN 39 BL 3740, who came in the opposite direction, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle driven by the 1st respondent and caused the accident. In the accident, the 1st respondent sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Therefore, the 1st respondent has filed the above claim petition claiming compensation against the 2nd respondent, driver-cum-owner of the Auto Rickshaw and appellant/Insurance Company, insurer of the said Auto Rickshaw.

4. The 2nd respondent, driver-cum-owner of the Auto Rickshaw remained exparte before the Tribunal.

5. The appellant/Insurance Company filed counter statement denying the manner of the accident stated by the 1st respondent and stated that the accident has occurred only due to negligence of the 1st respondent, who rode the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 39 BQ 5529 in a negligent manner. The 1st respondent sustained only simple injuries, the amount claimed by him is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

6. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1 and one Chinnasamy, his employer was examined as P.W.2 and 11 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P11. The appellant/Insurance Company did not let in any oral and documentary evidence. Disability certificate issued by the Medical Board, Kovai Medical College was marked as Ex.C1.

7. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the 2nd respondent, the driver-cum-owner of Auto Rickshaw and directed the 2nd respondent as well as appellant/Insurance Company being the insurer of the said Auto Rickshaw to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs.18,45,800/- as compensation to the 1st respondent.

8. Questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant/Insurance Company has come out with the present appeal.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company contended that the assessment of disability by the Medical Board is on the higher side and it has to be reviewed. The injuries sustained by the 1st respondent would not affect his earning capacity. The Tribunal without considering the same, adopted multiplier method and granted enhancement towards future prospects. The Tribunal in the absence of any document with regard to avocation and income of the 1st respondent, erred in fixing a sum of Rs.13,000/- towards monthly income and awarded a sum of Rs.14,62,500/- towards loss of earning, which is excessive. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities are also excessive and prayed for s