Permanent disability must be assessed concerning its actual impact on earning capacity, rather than a mechanical application of percentages.

JUDGMENT :

K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.

C.M.A. 182/2025 has been filed by the Appellant/Claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MCOP No.2054/2017, dated 15.04.2024, on the file of the Special Sub Judge No.II, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

2. C.M.A. 3333 of 2025 has been filed by the Appellant / Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation against the said Award.

3. Both the appeals arise out of the same accident and the same Award and hence, disposed of by this common judgment.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the claim petition.

5. The claimant has filed MCOP No.2054/2017 on the file of the Special Sub Judge No. II, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 14.01.2017.

6. According to the claimant, on 14.01.2017 at about 5.30 a.m., he was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No. TN-11- K-1165 along the Maduravoyal Tambaram Bypass Road at near Mudichur Sai Bhavan Garden, at the time, the driver of the respondent TNSTC bus bearing Registration No.TN-32-N-2837 proceeding in front of the claimant's motor cycle, suddenly applied brake, due to which the claimant's vehicle dashed against the respondent bus, as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries. The accident occurred only due to the negligent act of the driver of the bus. Hence, the respondent Corporation is liable to pay the compensation to the claimant.

7. The claim is resisted by the Respondent Corporation stating that, the rider of the motorcycle came in a rash and negligent manner, hit behind the bus and caused the accident. Hence, the Respondent Corporation is not liable to pay compensation.

8. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and considering the evidence available on record, concluded that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the respondent's driver to an extent of 80% and the claimant to an extent of 20% and accordingly, awarded compensation as hereunder:

After deducting 20% towards contributory negligence on the part of the claimant, directed the Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.14,80,000/- to the claimant together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.

9. Questioning the contributory negligence fixed by the tribunal and the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has filed C.M.A.No.No.182/2025 and the Respondent / Corporation has filed C.M.A.No. 3333/2025.

10. Ms.P.T.Saleem Fathima, the learned counsel for the claimant in CMA 182/2025 argued that, while the Tribunal has correctly held that the accident was due to the negligence of the respondent bus driver, but erred in fixing 20% contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. The Tribunal also erred in taking only 30% disability while the Medical Board assessed 41% disability. As per Discharge Summary marked as Ex.P4, the claimant has sustained fracture in Left Zygoma, Fracture Left Maxilla, Left ulnar styoloid, IDK left knee and Traumatic epididymitis right and was treated as inpatient from 14.01.2017 to 18.01.2017, 09.03.2017 to 14.03.2017 and 16.03.2017, i.e. for a period of 12 days and two surgeries were conducted. The tribunal has taken only net salary while fixing the monthly income of th