V S RAMANI Vs. S R VASUDEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL against order in O. P. N o. 191 of 1980. This is an appeal preferred by the first-respondent V. S. Ramani against the award in O. P. No. 191 of 1980 on the file of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (5th Judge, Court of Small Causes), Madras, finding that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the car by the first-respondent-appellant herein and passing an award for Rs. 11,800. So far as the contention of the second-respondent Insurance Company that the first-respondent V. S. Ramani , the owner of the car, who was driving the same at the time of the accident on 23. 9. 1979 had no driving licence and there is a violation of the condition of the policy and therefore the Insurance Company is not liable, it was held that the second-respondent Insurance Company is not liable. In the result an award for Rs. 11,800 with proportionate costs was passed in favour of the petitioner-first-respondent herein and against the first-respondent-appellant herein.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner-first-respondent before the tribunal, as mentioned in the petition under Sec 110-A of the Motor Vehicles act for compensation of Rs. 50,000 for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident on 23. 9. 1979 at about 9. 45 . m. near Lakshmi theatre, Aminjikarai , on Poonamallee High Road, Madras is to the following effect: THE first respondent herein was riding a scooter PYP 4606 in Poonamallee High Road, keeping to the extreme left side of the road and was driving slowly. THE car TMY 1659 driven by the first respondent in the same direction came from behind and knocked down the scooter and the petitioner was thrown out and sustained grievous injuries. THE accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the car by the first-respondent appellant. THE petitioner-first-respondent was treated in K. M. C. Hospital from 23. 9. 1979 to 30. 10. 1979 and was treated as out-patient till January, 1980 and he has also taken treatment under a private doctor. He sustained fracture of left femur and also dislocation of left arm and abrasion all over the body and he finds it difficult even now to walk. He is unable to lift weight and climb stairs and has pain while walking. THE first-respondent-appellant as the driver and owner of the car and the second respondent herein as the Insurance Company are liable.

(3.) IT is INTER ALIA contended on behalf of the appellant by Mr. A. Devanathan that the award of the Tribunal is contrary to law and that in fixing the quantum of compensation at Rs. 11 ,800 the Tribunal had erred on the excessive side and out of all proporation to the injuries sustained by the scooter rider. IT is also contended on behalf of the appellant that the Tribunal erred in awarding a sum of Rs. 10 ,000 under the heading pain and suffering which is highly excessive, having regard to the nature of injuries and the limited period of treatment undergone by the claimant.