(Judgment of this court was made by K.KALYANASUNDARAM,J.) This appeal is directed against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Ramanathapuram, in MCOP No.144 of 2011, dated 17.09.2016.
2.The respondent herein filed MCOP No.144 of 2011 claiming compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-. The case of the claimant is that on 02.05.2006 at about 2.00 pm, when he was proceeding in a motor cycle on Madurai-Mandapam main road nearing Kumaraiya temple bus stop nearby petrol bunk, a jeep bearing registration No.TN-65-G-248 came in a high speed and dashed against him. In the accident, he sustained grievous injuries and immediately, he was taken to Ramanathapuram Government Hospital and after first aid, he was referred to Madurai Meenakshi Mission Hospital, where he took treatment from 02.05.2006 to 10.06.2006 as inpatient.
3.The claimant has further stated that he was working as a wire-man in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and he was drawing Rs.14,121/- per month and after the accident, he lost his employment.
4.Before the tribunal, on the side of the claimant, four witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW4 and Exs.P1 to P20 were marked. On the side of the appellants, One Sunilkumar was examined as RW1 and no document was marked. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep driver and awarded compensation of Rs.38,86,898/-. Aggrieved by the award of the tribunal, the present appeal.
5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6.In the instant case, the claimant was not in a position to give evidence. The wife of the claimant gave evidence as PW1. PW3 is an eye witness to the occurrence and he has narrated the manner of the accident, which is supported by Ex.P1 (First Information Report). Ex.P2 is the sketch and Ex.P3 is the observation mahazar. The tribunal disbelieved the case of the appellants and held that the accident was happened due to the negligence of the jeep driver.
7.PW1, who is the wife of the deceased has deposed that her husband was working as Lineman in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, but because of the injuries sustained by her husband, he was not able to do any work. PW2, the Executive Engineer of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board has deposed that the claimant has joined as Helper in the Electricity Board on 16.11.1987 and he was promoted as line-man in the year 2006 and he was relieved from the work, as per the report of the Medical Board (Ex.P18).
8.On perusal of Ex.P18 Medical Board Certificate, it is seen that the claimant was working as Line Inspector and he was invalidated from the whole service with effect from 15.07.2008. Dr.Sahaya Steephen Raj has given evidence as PW4 and deposed that he examined the claimant and issued case summary of Ganesan and Hospital report, which were marked as Exs.P7 and P8. From the above documents, it is clear that the claimant suffered paralysis due to the brain injury. Further, he sustained fracture on the right side face and he lost his eyesight and movement of right hand and leg. Ex.P19 disability certificate establishes that he suffered 55% permanent disability.
9.The evidence of PW2 and Ex.P10 salary certificate reveal that the salary of the claimant was Rs.17,181/- per month. By adding 30% towards future prospects, the tribunal has arrived at Rs.22,335/- towards loss of income per month of the deceased and after deducting 10%, the tribunal has calculated the loss of annual income as Rs.2,68,023/- and after deducting 10% towards Income Tax, the loss of income was calculated at Rs.2,41,221/-. By applying multiplier '15', the tribunal has awarded Rs.36,18,315/- towards loss of income. In addition, Rs.55,000/- was awarded towards disability; Rs.25,000/- towards pain and sufferings; Rs.7,000/- for transportation; Rs.5,000/- towards extra nourishment and Rs.1,46,583/- towards medical bills; Rs.25,000/- for loss of amenities and Rs.5,000/- for attending charges.
10.In the case on hand, the tribunal has assessed the disability of the claimant as 100% and by applying proper multiplier awarded Rs.36,18,315/- , So, Rs.55,000/- awarded by the tribunal for disability, in our considered view, cannot be sustained. The award of the tribunal is modified as under:-
Head Award of the tribunal Award of this court Loss of Income Rs.36,18,315-00 Rs.36,18,315-00 Compensation for disability Rs. 55,000-00
--
11.In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. The award of the tribunal is reduced to Rs.38,31,898/- from Rs.38,86,898/. The interest award by the tribunal is maintained. The 2nd appellant is directed to deposit the modified award amount, less the amount already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such compliance, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount along with accrued interest and costs. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
To, The Motor Accident Claimants Tribunal/ Additional District Judge, Ramanathapuram.
.