(Prayer: C.M.A.No.791 of 2023 filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 04.11.2022 made in M.C.O.P.No.4854 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Small Causes Court, Chennai.
C.M.A.No.1732 of 2024 filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 04.11.2022 made in M.C.O.P.No.4854 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Small Causes Court, Chennai.)
Common Judgment
1. The parties are referred to herein as per their respective ranks before the Tribunal.
2. The claimant has preferred C.M.A.No.791 of 2023 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas, the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited has preferred C.M.A.No.1732 of 2024 challenging the entire negligence fixed on them and the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
3. The claim petition was filed by the claimant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred on 14.01.2017. According to the claimant, on 14.01.2017 at about 06.00 hours, the claimant was a passenger in SETC bus bearing Reg.No.TN 01 AN 0325 in Trichy-Madurai High Road towards Madurai and near Chettiyapatti Bridge, the driver of the said bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the rear side of one Maruti Swift Car which was also proceeding in the same direction ahead of the bus and due to overspeed, the said driver lost control and hit against another Tavera Car and then capsized. As a result of which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries.
4. The respondent/ State Express Transport Corporation Limited has filed a counter statement, wherein, it has been stated that the bus bearing Reg.No.TN 01 AN 0325 which is alleged to have been involved in the accident does not belong to the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited, since it was transferred to TNSTC (Tirunelveli) Limited on 15.10.2015 itself. If at all the claimant wants to claim any compensation, she must implead the TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited as a respondent. The respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimant.
5. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimant, the claimant herself was examined as P.W.1 and one Saravanabhavanandam, Doctor was examined as P.W.2 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P14 were marked. On the side of the respondent, no witness was examined and no document was marked.
6. On appreciation of evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal considering the evidence of P.W.1, concluded that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus bearing Reg.No.TN 01 AN 0325. With regard to quantum of compensation, the Tribunal, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, has taken the disability of the claimant as 7% and fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of disability and thereby, a sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rs.5,000/- * 7) was awarded under the head of disability and the following compensation was awarded by the Tribunal:-
| Sl.No. | Heads | Amount |
| 1 | Disability | Rs.35,000/- |
| 2 | Medical Expenses | Rs.3,500/- |
| 3 | Loss of income | Rs.11,000/- |
| 4 | Pain and suffering | Rs.5,000/- |
| 5 | Transportation expenses | Rs.5,000/- |
| 6 | Nutrition Expenses | Rs.5,000/- |
| 7 | Damages to clothes | Rs.2,000/- |
| 8 | Attender Charges | Rs.5,000/- |
| Total | Rs.71,500/- |
8. The learned counsel appearing for the State Express Transport Corporation Limited/appellant in C.M.A.No.1732 of 2024 would submit that the Tribunal has failed to note that the claim against the State Express Transport Corporation Limited is not sustainable one, because it is mandatory to implead TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited as a necessary party to claim compensation. The Tribunal failed to note that the bus does not belong to the State Express Transport Corporation Limited, since the actual ownership is vested with the TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited and the claim petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited. The Tribunal failed to consider the fact that the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited is not the owner of the vehicle at the time of accident and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is also on the higher side.
9. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant/appellant in C.M.A.No.791 of 2023 would submit that the accident took place in the year 2017, however, the Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of disability which appears to be meager and to strengthen his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited vs. Manivannan and others reported in 2024 (1) TNMAC 598(DB), to show that for the accident took place in the year 2017, the Tribunal ought to have awarded a sum of Rs.7,000/- for each percentage of disability. He would further submit that though the respondent/ State Express Transport Corporation Limited has taken a stand that the bus involved in the accident does not belong to them and it was transferred to TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited, in order to prove the said fact, they have not chosen to examine any witness and not produced any other document and in the absence of proof for the same, the Tribunal has rightly fixed the entire negligence on the part of the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited and directed them to pay compensation. He would further submit that as per the evidence of P.W.2, Doctor, who treated the claimant and issued the Disability Certificate, the claimant has sustained 20% of partial permanent disability, however, the Tribunal has taken the disability of the claimant as 7% which is not sustainable one.
10. This Court considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.
11. The main grievance of the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited is that the bus bearing Reg.No.TN 01 AN 0325 involved in the accident does not belong to the State Express Transport Corporation Limited and it was transferred to TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited on 15.10.2015 itself. In order to prove the said fact, the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited has not examined any witness and not filed any document before the Tribunal. In the absence of proof for establishing the fact that the bus does not belong to the State Express Transport Corporation Limited, the Tribunal has rightly fixed the entire negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and directed the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited to pay the entire compensation. Further, it is seen from the records that the respondent/ State Express Transport Corporation Limited has preferred the appeal in the year 2023, however, till date, the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited have not chosen to file any application to implead the TNSTC Tiruneveli Limited as a necessary party in the appeal. It is not in dispute that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal has been deposited by the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited. In such view of the matter, the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited is liable to pay compensation to the claimant.
12. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited would submit that a suitable direction may be issued to TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited, to recover the compensation amount, which has already been deposited before the Tribunal.
13. However, it is relevant to note that SETC and TNSTC are coming under the Transport Department of State of Tamil Nadu. In such circumstances, it is for the respondent/State Express Transport Corporation Limited, to take appropriate steps to recover the compensation amount from TNSTC Tirunelveli Limited, if required.
14. With regard to the quantum of compensation, as per the evidence of P.W.2, Doctor, who issued the Disability Certificate, the claimant has sustained 20% of partial permanent disability and at the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 54 years and working as a coolie. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, the Tribunal has rightly taken the disability of the claimant as 7%, however, fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of disability which appears to be very meager. By applying the ratio laid down by this Court in the case of Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited vs. Manivannan and others reported in 2024 (1) TNMAC 598(DB), this Court is inclined to fix a sum of Rs.7,000/- for each percentage of disability and hence, a sum of Rs.49,000/- (Rs.7,000/- * 7) is awarded under the head of disability. It is seen from the records that as per Ex.P3/Discharge summary issued by the Government Hospital, Trichy, the claimant took treatment as inpatient in the hospital from 14.01.2017 to 15.01.2017 and was diagnosed with multiple injuries and as per Ex.P4/Discharge summary issued by KMC Hospital, the claimant took treatment as in-patient from 19.01.2017 to 26.01.2017 and he was diagnosed with the head injury/right SCH Peripheral vertigo/STH. Totally, the claimant took treatment as in-patient for 10 days as per Ex.P3 and Ex.P4. Further, at the time of accident, the claimant was a coolie worker and earning a sum of Rs.450/- per day, however, the Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.11,000/- as monthly income of the claimant and assumed that she would not have carried on her work for one month and awarded a sum of Rs.11,000/- for one month. Considering the age of the claimant at the time of accident as 54 years and the date of accident and the nature of work done by the claimant, this Court is inclined to enhance the monthly income from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.15,000/- and to grant two months salary for the period of treatment and accordingly, a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.15,000/- * 2) is awarded under the head of loss of income. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and Ex.P3/Discharge summary issued by Government Hospital, Trichy and Ex.P4/Discharge summary issued by KMC Hospital and Ex.P13/Disability Certificate, this Court is inclined to enhance the compensation awarded under the head of nutrition expenses from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.20,000/- and accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as hereunder:-
| S.No | Head of Compensation | Amount awarded by the Tribunal (Rs) | Amount awarded by this Court (Rs) |
| 1. | Disability | Rs.35,000/- | Rs.49,000/- |
| 2. | Medical Expenses | Rs.3,500/- | Rs.3,500/- |
| 3. | Loss of income | Rs.11,000/- | Rs.30,000/- |
| 4. | Pain and suffering | Rs.5,000/- | Rs.5,000/- |
| 5. | Transportation Expenses | Rs.5,000/- | Rs.5,000/- |
| 6. | Nutrition Expenses | Rs.5,000/- | Rs.20,000/- |
| 7. | Damages to clothes | Rs.2,000/- | Rs.2,000/- |
| 8. | Attender Charges | Rs.5,000/- | Rs.5,000/- |
| Total | Rs.71,500/- | Rs.1,19,500/- |