COMMON JUDGMENT

Both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are directed against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.78 of 2015, dated 24.06.2020, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge, Srivilliputhur.

2. In C.M.A.(MD)No.148 of 2021, the appellant/claimant, who was awarded with the compensation of Rs.1,26,968/- for the injuries sustained by him, challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and claimed enhancement.

3. In C.M.A.(MD)No.190 of 2022, the appellant/Insurer, who was made liable to pay compensation of Rs.1,26,968/- with interest at 9% per annum and costs to the claimant for the disability sustained, consequent to the accident occurred on 09.12.2014, challenged the liability mulcted on it and the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

4. It is not in dispute that on 09.12.2014 at 05.15p.m., when the claimant was riding a Honda Dream Neo motorcycle, bearing Registration No.TN-84-8244 in Srivilliputhur to Malli main road and on the east of Muthu Lakshmi mill, suddenly a dog crossed the road and hence, the claimant had applied the brake and dashed against the Tamarind Tree and fell down and sustained injuries. The claimant, after getting treatment at Madurai Vadamalayan Hospital, has laid the claim petition under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the Insurer claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him and also the damages caused to the vehicle.

5. During the trial, the claimant has examined himself as P.W.1 and exhibited 21 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.21. The Insurer has examined one witness as R.W.1 and exhibited the copy of the Insurance Policy as R.W.1. The claimant's disability certificate has been exhibited as Ex.C.1. The learned trial Judge, upon considering the evidence both oral and documentary, has passed the impugned award, by holding that the claimant is entitled to get the benefits under the Personal Accident Coverage to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.26,968/- towards compensation for the damages caused to the vehicle, all totalling Rs.1,26,968/- with interest and costs. Aggrieved by the said award, both the claimant as well as the Insurer have come forward with the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeals.

6. The points for consideration are (1) Whether the trial Court erred in applying the personal accident coverage and granting the entire amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the claimant, despite showing that the personal accident coverage is applicable only for the death or permanent total disablement and not for partial permanent disablement and for other medical expenses?

(2) Whether the Tribunal erred in not granting any compensation for the pain and suffering suffered by the claimant and for expenses towards further treatment?

(3) Whether the Tribunal erred in awarding Rs.1,00,000/-, even after giving a finding that the claimant is entitled to get Rs.2,00,000/- for the disability suffered?

(4) Whether the impugned award dated 24.06.2020 is liable to be set aside?

The Points 1 to 4:

7. The learned Counsel for the Insurer would strongly contend that the injured himself was the tort-feasor, as he had caused the accident by his own negligence and as such, the claim petition itself is not legally maintainable under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and that the very claim petition filed under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act is legally unsustainable.

8. In the case on hand, admittedly, the claimant has filed a petition under Section 163(A) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned Counsel for the claimant would submit that since the claimant has filed the claim petition under Section 163(A) of the said Act, there was no need or necessity for them to prove the negligence and that it was only an accident arising out of the use of the motorcycle.

9. At this juncture, it is necessary to refer the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ningamma and another Vs. United India Insurance Company Limited reported in 2009 (13) SCC