COMMON JUDGMENT

Both appeal and Cross objection filed against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special Sub Court), Coimbatore, dated 11.1.2013, in M.C.O.P.No.2229 of 2012, both are heard together and disposed of by common judgment.

2 Brief facts of the case is as follows:

On 24.10.2009 at about 10.00 a.m. when the petitioner was riding his Yamaha motorcycle bearing registration No.TN-37-BB-1409 at Podhanur – Nanjundapuram road, second respondent herein drove a lorry bearing registration No. TN-27-T-8822 from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner without adhering traffic rules and hit against the petitioner's motorcycle, thereby caused accident, resulting the petitioner fell down and sustained grievous injuries. A case has been registered in Cr.No.280 of 2009 under Section 279 and 338 of I.P.C. by T.I.W. (West) Police station. The petitioner has filed a claim petition before the tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- against the appellant and the third respondent herein being the insurer and owner of the vehicle.

3. The appellant/Insurance Company has filed a counter statement denied the averments made in the claim petition and disputed negligence as well as liability against the Insurance Company.

4. The second and third respondent herein remained exparte before the tribunal. On the side of the claimants, P.W.1 to 4 were examined and Ex.P1 to P19 were marked. On the side of the Insurance Company/appellant, no witness was examined or any document marked.

5. Tribunal, based on the oral and documentary evidence and upon hearing both sides, found that due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry driven by its driver caused accident and fixed the liability as against the appellant/ Insurance Company and awarded a sum of Rs.13,96,445/- as compensation to the claimant along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. The award passed by the tribunal under various heads are as follows:

6. Challenging the said award, the Insurance Company has filed the present appeal against the award passed by the tribunal fastening liability on the Insurance Company and also on the ground of quantum of compensation. The respondent/claimant also filed Cross Objection No.5 of 2016 for enhancement of compensation.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant and perused the materials available on record.

8. The respondent/claimant marked Ex.P1 to P19 especially Ex.P3 Wound certificate, Ex.P5 Medical bills, Ex.P6 Discharge summaries, Ex.P7 X-rays, Ex.P8 Scan reports, Ex.P10 Photograph of the wound and Ex.P13 disability certificate, etc. were produced before the tribunal and P.W.1 to 4 were examined. P.W.2 Dr.K.Gajendran deposed before the tribunal that based on the aforesaid document, he assessed 33% partial permanent disability sustained by the petitioner due to the accident. The tribunal also found that the petitioner has undergone three surgeries and his face was severely injured due to the accident. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the tribunal wrongly adopted multiplier method when there is no evidence placed before the tribunal to prove that the respondent/claimant suffered future earning capacity due to the said accident. P.W.2 Doctor who examined the victim, assessed 33% partial permanent disability. Therefore, award passed by the tribunal under the head partial permanent disability is excessive and same is liable to be modified. In sofar as other heads also, the appellant seeks modification.

9 The claimant/respondent in the Cross objection contended that the claimant suffered 33% pa