The central legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of compensation for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, including the determination of contributory negligence and disability.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2019 passed in M.C.O.P. No.746 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Judge No.2, Salem.)

1. The appellant/claimant viz., B.Idhayakumar, unsatisfied with the quantum of compensation, awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award, dated 25.01.2019, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Judge No.2, Salem, in M.C.O.P. No.746 of 2017, has preferred this appeal seeking for enhancement.

2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, under the impugned award, has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,45,060/-/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% and costs to the appellant/claimant, which is detailed hereunder:

3. On 19.01.2017, due to the accident caused by a vehicle, owned and driven by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, the appellant/claimant has sustained left hand elbow bone fractures and grievous injuries all over his body, viz., type I open comminuted fracture humerus left. Therefore, he preferred a Claim Petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special District Judge, Salem seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him.

4. Before the Tribunal, the appellant/claimant has filed four documents, which were marked as Exs.P1 to Ex.P4 and examined himself as P.W.1. On the side of the second respondent/Insurance Company, no document was marked and no witness was examined. Wound Certificate was marked as Ex.C.1. Since the appellant/claimant had not possessed valid licence at the time of accident, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal fixed contributory negligence at 80% on the part of the second respondent/ Insurance Company and 20% on the part of the appellant/claimant.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/claimant mainly contended that the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is not in commensuration with the grievousness of the injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant. As far as the contributory negligence aspect is concerned, in the absence of any material evidence to prove the negligence on the part of the appellant/claimant, the Tribunal had committed grave error in fixing the contributory negligence on the part of the appellant/claimant at 20%. The appellant/claimant had sustained left hand elbow bone fractures and grievous injuries all over his body and taken treatment at Dharan Hospital, Salem as an inpatient from 19.01.2017 to 22.01.2017 and also taken treatment as an outpatient as seen from Exhibit P3/discharge summary, issued by the said hospital. Moreover, the Medical Board assessed and issued Certificate certifying that the appellant/claimant sustained 18% permanent disability due to the above injuries sustained by him. However, the Tribunal has reduced the same and assessed the disability only at 4.5%. The functional disability awarded by the Tribunal as seen from the impugned award is Rs.1,02,060/- and the same has to be enhanced. As the quantum of compensation awarded under the other heads are also very meagre, the total compensation has been considerably reduced. Hence, the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant prays for enhancement of the Award.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent/ Insurance Company refuted the contention raised by the appellant/claimant by stating that the appellant/claimant did not suffer any grievous injuries and he had not taken treatment continuously in view of the fact that the injuries are not so grave. The Tribunal has rightly fixed the contributory negligence on the part of the appellant/c