DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MURUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SECOND respondent in O.P. (MV) 526 of 1987 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kollam has filed the appeal challenging the award of compensation of Rs. 12,000/ - in favour of claimant (1st respondent) mainly on the ground that the Tribunal overlooked Section 142 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Contention of the appellant is that the injuries sustained by the first respondent would not come under Section 142 of the Act. It is also contended by the appellant that at any rate the award of compensation calls for interference as the Tribunal went wrong in awarding Rs. 12,000/ - as compensation instead of the legally permissible amount of Rs. 7,500/ -.

(2.) APPELLANT 's first contention is that the injuries sustained by the first respondent would not attract Section 142 of the Act and hence the Tribunal went wrong in awarding compensation. It is pointed out by the Counsel for the appellant that Section 142 can be invoked only in a case of death or permanent disablement of any person which has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles and as the wound certificate does not reveal of any permanent disablement as a result of the injuries sustained by the first respondent it is a case where the Tribunal ought to have dismissed the petition.

(3.) EXT . A -5 discharge card shows that the first respondent is having 20% permanent partial disability on account of the compression fracture of 6th vertebra. As the injuries sustained by the first respondent has caused a fracture on the vertebra appellant cannot contend that it would not amount to a permanent disablement as envisaged under Section 142. As the evidence in the case shows that the injuries sustained by the first respondent would amount to permanent disablement contention of the appellant that the Tribunal went wrong in awarding compensation is not tenable.