The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to modify the compensation awarded by the Tribunal based on the claimant's injuries, notional income, future prospects, and medical expenses.

JUDGMENT

(Common Prayer: These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 21.01.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.1 of 2015 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode.)

Common Judgment:

V.M. Velumani, J.

1. C.M.A.No.3170 of 2017 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 21.01.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.1 of 2015 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode. C.M.A.No.1897 of 2022 is filed by the Insurance Company against the award dated 21.01.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.1 of 2015 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode.

2. Both the appeals arise out of the same accident and same award and hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment. Parties in these appeals are referred to by their respective ranks in the claim petition for the sake of convenience.

3. The claimant filed M.C.O.P.No.1 of 2015 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode, claiming a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 04.06.2014.

4. According to the claimant, on the date of accident i.e., on 04.06.2014 at about 5.40 P.M., while he was driving his Maruthi Omni van bearing Registration No.TN-36-D-0999 along with his family members, near the bus stop at Lakshmipuram on the left side of Coimbatore to Karur Main Road from West to East direction, the 1st respondent, the driver of Maruthi Swift car bearing Registration No.TN-47-AC-6090 belonging to the 2nd respondent, who was coming in the opposite direction, attempted to overtake one antecedent vehicle, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, came on the wrong side of the road, dashed against the Omni van driven by the claimant and caused the accident. In the accident, the claimant and other occupants of the Omni van sustained injuries. Therefore, the claimant has filed the above claim petition claiming compensation as against the respondents 1 to 3, driver, owner and insurer of the Maruthi Swift car respectively.

5. The respondents 1 and 2, driver and owner of the Maruthi Swift car remained exparte before the Tribunal.

6. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company, insurer of the Maruthi Swift car filed counter statement denying the averments made by the claimant and stated that the accident was not intimated to the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent, driver of the Maruthi Swift car and claimant did not possess driving license to drive the vehicles at the time of accident and therefore, the claimant is also responsible for the accident. The owner and insurer of the Maruthi Omni van driven by the claimant were not made as parties to the proceedings and hence, the claim petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Therefore, the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimant. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company has also denied the age, avocation, income and nature of injuries sustained by the claimant. In any event, the compensation claimed by the claimant is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

7. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1, one Kumar, Assistant Manager from Ganga Hospital at Coimbatore, was examined as P.W.2, Gokulraj, Senior Associate, Rehabilitation Service in Ottobock Health Care India Pvt. Limited, Coimbatore, was examined as P.W.3 and 47 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P47. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company did not let in any oral and documentary evidence.

8. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the 1st respondent, driver of Maruthi Swift car belonging to the 2nd respondent and directed the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company being insurer of the said car to pay a sum of Rs.35,85,355/-