R. ANANTHA PADMANABAN Vs. M.P. LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/petitioner has preferred the present appeal in C.M.A.(MD).No.91 of 2004, against the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.33 of 2001, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kulithalai.

(2.) THE petitioner, has filed the claim in M.C.O.P.No.33 of 2001, claiming a compensation of a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from the respondents, for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident. It was submitted that on 21.08.2000, at about 02.00 a.m. in the night, when the petitioner was travelling in the 1st respondents Ambassador car bearing registration No.TMR-8971, along with one R.Purushothaman, from Thottiyam to Chennai and when the car was proceeding near Mangalam Cross road, the driver of the car drove the car at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed it against the lorry bearing registration No.BY-01B-5199, coming in the opposite direction. Due to the head on collision between the two vehicles, the petitioner sustained injuries all over his body and was admitted at the Tindivanam Government Hospital. Subsequently, he took treatment, as an inpatient, at Vijaya Health Centre, Chennai, from 21.08.2000 to 05.10.2000 and latter on took treatment as an outpatient from 06.10.2000 onwards. The petitioner has spent over Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses. After the accident, the petitioner is not able to do any work as he used to do before the accident. At prior to the accident, the petitioner was employed as an Agriculturist and also worked as an operator of film reels and earning Rs.5,200/- per month. Hence, the petitioner has filed the claim as against the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are the owner and insurer of the car bearing registration No.TMR-8971.

(3.) THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal framed two issues for consideration in the case namely: (1) Due to whose negligence was the accident caused?; (2) What is the quantum of compensation which the petitioner is entitled to get?.