M VIGNESHWARAN Vs. R ANBAZHAGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is at the instance of the injured claimant who was awarded a sum of Rs. 2,28,000/- for the injuries suffered by him in a motor accident that occurred on 01.06.2012. Though, the Tribunal arrived at the compensation payable at Rs. 4,55,740/-, it awarded only a sum of Rs. 2,28,000/-, since it found that the injured claimant had contributed to an extent of 50% to the accident.

(2.) The case of the claimant before the Tribunal was that while he was riding a Motor Cycle bearing Registration No.TN-19-Y-5586, on the East Coast Road at about 130 hrs on 01.06.2012, a Mahindra Scorpio Car, bearing Registration No.TN-31-CZ-0009, just coming from behind in the same direction, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the Motor Cycle. As a result of the accident, the claimants suffered grievous injuries all over the body including a compound Grade III B fracture of both bones in the right leg and fracture shaft of Humerus Left Side with finger drop and right Mandibular Angle fracture and left Mandibular Parasymphysis Fracture and Bilateral Parietal Contusions. Contending that the injuries had resulted in permanent disability, the claimant had sought for a compensation of Rs. 30,00,000/-. According to the claimant, he was a Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineering and he was in working in a Mechanic Shop, earning Rs. 20,000/- per month.

(3.) The claim was resisted by the Insurance Company contending that the accident did not occur due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Mahindra Scorpio Car. It was further contended that the injured claimant/appellant drove the two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner and invited the accident. It was also contended that the injured claimant did not have the valid license at the time of the accident. Therefore, according to the Insurance Company, the injured claimant had also contributed to the accident. The Age, Educational Qualification and the Income particulars as well as the quantum of disability claimed were also denied by the Insurance Company.