V VELLINGIRI Vs. R KAVITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the award dated 29.01.2011 made in M.C.O.P.No.333 of 2009, the appellant/claimant have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by questing correctness of contributory negligence fixed against claimant and inadequate compensation granted by the tribunal under various heads.

(2.) It is the case of grievous injury/amputation of right leg suffered by the injured claimant, who was working as Driver and earned Rs. 7,500.00 pm and he was only 32 years and accident happened on 15.03.2009. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident happened due to rash and negligent driving of the first respondent car driver 60% as contributory negligence, and relying Ex.P-4 Rough Sketch and fixing 40% contributory negligence against claimant and directing the second respondent insurance company, to pay their liability, and the Tribunal held that the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Based on the pleadings and evidences the learned tribunal granted compensation under following heads:-

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant contended that tribunal ought not to have merely relied on Ex.P-4, Rough sketch without any evidence led by the respondents more particularly, the offending vehicle driver and has fixed the contributory negligence as against the claimant. As per rulings of Honourable Apex Court reported in Jiju Kuruvila Vs Kunjujamma Mohan, 2013 2 TNMAC 44 (SC) it is categorically held that rough sketch cannot be relied without independent witness to fix any contributory negligence. Therefore finding of tribunal is perverse, incompetent and liable to set aside in limini. And entire negligence, liability has to be fixed against the respondents herein.