The Insurance Company which was arrayed as the second respondent in M.C.O.P No.136 of 2011 has come forward to this appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in a case of injury to the victim of a road accident.
2. On 07.08.2010 at about 4.30 p.m., Mottiah Gounder was walking along Hosur Bus Stand to Bagalur Road, when a lorry belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent dashed against him and injured him grievously. Alleging that the accident had occasioned due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry, the victim of the accident preferred a claim of Rs.10,00,000/-. The Tribunal however, had fixed the compensation at Rs.6,92,800/- payable with interest at 7.5% p.a. As already indicated, the quantum so awarded is now challenged. In the accident, the claimant's right leg was amputated, as a result, he cannot walk, stand for a long time, climb up or down the stairs, squat on the floor.
3. The appellant was aged 50 years at that relevant time and was working as a mason and stated to be earning Rs.9,000/- a month. The Tribunal, however fixed the income based on the realistic assessment of per day earning at Rs.200/- and fixed it at Rs.6,000/- per month. PW2, the doctor who evaluated the extent of his disability has assessed it at 65%. The Tribunal accepted it and applied a multiplier of 13, commensurate with the age of the victim and reduced the same by 65% and arrived at a compensation of Rs.6,08,400/-[Rs.6000 x 12 x 13 x 65%] on the head of disablement. Adding other heads of compensation [Rs.65,000/- for pain and suffering; Rs.9,400/- towards medical bills; Rs.5,000/- each towards transport expenses and extra nourishment], the Tribunal arrived at the said amount of compensation.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal was wrong in adopting the multiplier method, and even if it has to be applied, it ought to have determined the functional disability of the claimant at a rate far below 65%, which PW2 has prescribed.
5.There is no representation for the respondent/claimant. On perusing the record I find that the Tribunal in fact has been too charitable in fixing the quantum of functional disability at 65%. The compensation awarded on other heads of non-pecuniary damages too are not excessive as to warrant any interference.
6.In the result, I do not find any merit in the appeal and hence it is dismissed but without costs. If the appellant has not deposited the entire amount that has been directed by the Tribunal, it is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereupon, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same forthwith. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.08.2017 ds/kas Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No N.SESHASAYEE,J.
ds/kas To:
1.The Sub Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Hosur at Krishnagiri District.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.3219 of 2013 02.08.2017