D MARIA SELVARAJ Vs. D RAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed against the fair and decretal order dated 13.03.2008 made in M.C.O.P.Nos.4104 of 2004 and 4105 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, respectively.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the Tribunal.

(3.) The case of the petitioners is that on 17.05.2004 at about 1.00 a.m., the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.4104 [C.M.A.No.1463/2013] was travelling in the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-04-M-1616 from Mudichur to Kundapur in Karnataka and as they were approaching Singadivakkam junction, driver of the said van driving the vehicle at high speed and in negligent manner, dashed against the stationary lorry bearing Registration No.KA-01-AA-1222, resulting in the accident. The rash and negligent driving by the driver of the van in which the petitioner travelled was the cause for the accident. The other petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.4105/2004 [C.M.A.No.501/2014] was travelling in the said van along with the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.4104/2004. Thus, both the petitioners claim the negligence of the driver of the van, in which they travelled, only caused the accident. The petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.4104/2004 was aged 25 years and by working as a supervisor in a private concern was earning Rs.6,000/-per month. Due to the injury suffered by him, namely, Grade III B both bone fracture fibula neck fracture, right lower 1/3rd fibula fracture, left wrist fracture, ligamentous injury, left knee and other injuries, he is not able to attend to his work regularly. Hence, the petitioner seeks a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation. Similarly, the petitioner in M.C.O.P.No.4105/2004 was aged 25 years and was working as a grader in the private concern earning Rs.4,000/- per month. He suffered Right knee fracture, left knee fracture, injuries on the cheek and injury over the forehead and he is unable to attend to his work regularly. Hence, he sought for compensation of Rs.4,78,000/- from the respondent who are the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle.