Madras High Court
Balamurugan vs Ramakrishnan on 20 April, 2021
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
Balamurugan,
S/o.Balasubramaniyam ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Ramakrishnan,
S/o.Mayakrishnan
2.Nibin K.Thomas,
S/o.Thomas K.C
3.The United India Insurance Company Limited,
Represented by its Branch Manager,
No.IV/108 E2, II Floor, Koodali Arcade,
Amballur Town and District Munsifi,
Kerala. ... Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 04.02.2013 made in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.156 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, District Judge, Karaikal.
For Appellant : Mr.D.Bharatha Chakkravarthy
For Respondents :
For R1 & R2 : No appearance
For R3 : Mr.C.Paranthaman
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 1 of 6
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
JUDGMENT
The claimant is the appellant in this appeal and has filed this
appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, District Judge, Karaikal in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.156 of 2011.
2. By the impugned Judgment and decree, the Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.3,77,855/- as compensation under the following
heads:-
Heads of Compensation Amount awarded by the Tribunal
For Pain and Sufferings Rs. 25,000/-
For Extra Nourishment Rs. 5,000/-
For Partial Disability Rs. 50,000/-
For Transport Expenses Rs. 2,000/-
For Medical Expenses Rs.2,90,855/-
For Loss of Income for two months Rs. 5,000/-
Total Rs.3,77,855/-
3. The appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in awarding a
meagre compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards partial disability. It is
submitted that the evidences on record and the deposition of
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 2 of 6
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
P.W.2-Doctor indicates that the disability of the appellant was 65% on
account of the injury and therefore the Tribunal ought to have awarded
higher amount towards compensation. It is futher submitted that the
Tribunal ought to have awarded higher amount towards pain and
suffering and loss of income.
4. On behalf of the respondents, the learned counsel for the 3rd
respondent/Insurance Company submitted that the impugned Judgment
and decree passed by the Tribunal is well-reasoned and requires no
interference and therefore prays for dismissal of the appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the 3rd
respondent.
6. In my view, the Tribunal has awarded a fair compensation of
most of the headings, though use of the expression partial disability
appears to be misnomer considering the nature of injuries suffered by the
appellant/claimant namely injury on the right lower limb, where surgery
was conducted by fixing steel plate with screws.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 3 of 6
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
7. The compensation awarded towards partial disability for a sum
of Rs.50,000/- appears to be reasonable. However, the Tribunal has
awarded a meagre sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income for two
months.
8. In the claim petition, the appellant/claimant has stated that he
was earing a sum of Rs.750/- per day. If the aforesaid amount is
considered, the monthly income of the appellant/claimant would be
Rs.19,500/- for 26 days. It appears to be highly improbable in absence
any documents to substantiate the same.
9. Therefore, it would be fair to conclude that the
appellant/claimant would have earned a sum of Rs.12,500/- per month
for the purpose of awarding compensation. The nature of injuries would
have put him out of action for atleast six months. Therefore, the amount
of compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of income is
enhanced to Rs.75,000/-. (Rs.12,500/-x6 = Rs.75,000/-) from Rs.5,000/-.
In the result, the total amount of compensation is enhanced to
Rs.4,47,855/-.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 4 of 6
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
10. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company is therefore directed to
deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.4,47,855/- after
deducting amount already deposited by it together with interest at 7.5%
per annum from the date of numbering of the claim petition till the date
of such deposit, less any amount already deposited within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
11. There is a delay of 163 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, no
interest shall be paid on the enhanced amount of compensation during the
delay of 163 days alone.
12. On such deposit being made by the 3rd respondent/Insurance
Company, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the same
together with interest accrued thereon, less the amount already
withdrawn if any, by filing suitable application before the Tribunal.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 5 of 6
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
C.SARAVANAN, J.
arb
13. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed. No
cost.
20.04.2021
arb
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
To:
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
District Judge, Karaikal.
2.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Section,
Madras High Court.
C.M.A.No.3639 of 2019
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 6 of 6
