HC decries litigious tendency of govt, undertakings

Appalled by the government's litigious tendency reflecting in its appeal against a verdict awarding a rather modest compensation to a young man reduced to "vegetative state" in a mishap involving a state bus, the Madras High Court has more than doubled the sum to Rs 25 lakh.

Justice S Vimala awarded the exemplary compensation to 21-year-old Manikandan, taking note of his permanent urethral disability after the mishap 11 year ago, making him dependent upon the external tubes and other fixtures to pass the urine and lose his marriage prospects for good.

The judge enhanced the compensation from Rs 10.48 lakh to Rs 25 lakh while adjudicating an appeal by the Tamil Nadu's State Transport Corporation, challenging the modest compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

The Tribunal had ordered the Rs 10.48 lakh compensation, assessing that youth had lost his earning capacity up to 75 percent.

But, Justice Vimala said, "Having regard to the nature of the urinary problem, the loss of earning capacity should have been fixed at 100 per cent and not at 75 per cent (as calculated by the tribunal), as the claimant has a mere vegetative living."

Incidentally, the tribunal itself had awarded an enhanced compensation to boy, who had sought a sum of Rs 6 lakh only despite undergoing treatment for over three years after his accident in September 2006.

Appalled by the state's litigious temperament, prone to challenge each and every judicial verdict, the judge said the state and its instrumentalities were the major litigant before courts and their contribution to the "docket (cases) explosion is considerable."

"If the transport corporation has toed the line of State Litigation Policy, as a responsible public sector undertaking, it would have abstained from filling this appeal as this is a case where the tribunal itself has awarded more than what is claimed by the petitioner.

"The corporation had the opportunity to see the pitiable condition in which the petitioner is placed on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident," the judge said.

The state and its undertakings shall, herein after, think twice before launching a prosecution, preferring an appeal or defending some litigation on "filthy and frivolous" grounds that too after burning a big hole on the state exchequer, amounting to 'pyrrhic victory,' she said.

The corporation has not only lost the appeal, but also suffered the liability to pay more compensation, the judge added.

The appellant had challenged the award by the tribunal as excessive and disproportionate contending that this was not a fit case to adopt multiplier method for the purpose of assessing the loss of earning capacity.

Stating that the man had suffered fracture of hip bone and rupture of urinary bladder leading to fixation of alternative urinary passage externally, the judge said it had been stated that there was no control over passing of urine.

"It is the claim of the injured that the passage had to be expanded at least once in a month. The tube has to be changed twice in a month. The claimant has lost the chance of getting married, because of the urethral injuries suffered," the judge noted in her order.

The man had appeared before her in her chambers for the hearing all along carrying the urinary bag which would not make him feel comfortable to stand in front of others, the judge said.

She directed the corporation to deposit the compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum.

(This article has not been edited by DNA's editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)