Madras High Court
National Insurance Company ... vs M.Praveen Kumar on 22 April, 2021
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Date : 22.04.2021
Coram :
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2031 of 2013
National Insurance Company Limited
Main Road, Gobi Branch, Gobi Town.
.. Appellant
Versus
1. M.Praveen Kumar
2. K.Madhes
3. K.Ruthiramoorthy
4. K.Moorthy
5. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Coimbatore Division-II, Erode Region
Chennimalai Road, Erode
by its Managing Director. .. Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of The Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Order and Decreetal order dated 18.09.2012
made in MACTOP No.161 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Subordinate Court), Bhavani.
For Appellant : Mrs.N.B.Surekha
For Respondent-1 : M/s.E.P.Senniyangiri
For Respondents 2-4 : No appearance
For Respondent-5 : M/s.A.Sundaravadhanam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/9
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
JUDGMENT
Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal in and by the award dated 18.09.2012 made in MACTOP No.161 of
2010 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Court),
Bhavani, the third respondent in the claim petition/National Insurance
Company has preferred this appeal challenging the liability and quantum of
compensation.
2. On 20.08.2009 at about 7.45pm, while the claimant was travelling
as a passenger and sitting at right side back portion of a bus bearing
registration No.TN-33-N-1994 belonging to the fifth respondent-Transport
Corporation, which was driven by its driver/fourth respondent herein on
Bhavani-Anthiyur main road from south to north towards Anthiyur at the left
side of the main road, the tipper lorry bearing registration No.TN-36-K-6594,
belonging to third respondent and insured with appellant herein, came in the
same direction, in a rash and negligent manner and hit the right side back
portion of the bus, due to which, the claimant/first respondent herein sustained
multiple grievous injuries and hence, the claimant/first respondent herein
claimed a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
3. The claim petition filed by the claimant was resisted by the
Insurance Company/appellant disputing the involvement of the vehicle, the
manner of the accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant and also
disputed the quantum of compensation sought by the claimant.
4. In order to prove the claim, on the side of claimant, PW.1 to PW.4
were examined and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked. On the side of respondents,
before the Tribunal, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced.
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the entire evidence available on
record, came to the conclusion that the accident was due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and passed an award for a sum of
Rs.5,73,900/- and directed the Insurance Company/insurer of the offending
vehicle to pay the same with interest at 7.5% p.a. On careful perusal though
the Tribunal fixed the liability on the offending vehicle lorry and directed the
third respondent to pay the compensation mistakenly noted the registration
number of the bus instead of the registration number of lorry.
Sl. Head under which the Amount awarded by
No amount is awarded the Tribunal(in Rs.)
1 Loss of future earnings Rs.3,02,400/-
2 Pain and Suffering Rs. 20,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
Sl. Head under which the Amount awarded by
No amount is awarded the Tribunal(in Rs.)
3 Medical expenses Rs.2,30,000/-
4 Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/-
5 Transportation Rs. 2,000/-
6 Damages to clothes Rs. 1,000/-
8 Attendant charges Rs. 13,500/-
Total Rs.5,73,900/-
6. Though the appellant/Insurance Company preferred the appeal
questioning the liability and quantum, the learned counsel for the
appellant/Insurance Company would mainly contend that the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'loss of future earning' is on the
higher side. It is contended that the Tribunal misdirected itself in fixing the
income of the injured at Rs.4,500/- per month. It is further contended that the
Tribunal ought not to have adopted multiplier method, when there is no
evidence to conclude that the injured cannot do any avocation and earn income
in future. Therefore, the learned counsel submitted that the interference of this
Court is required to reduce the compensation.
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent/claimant
would submit that the Tribunal, after considering the nature of injuries,
disability and treatment taken by the claimant and also considering the age of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
the claimant, awarded a correct compensation and the same requires no
interference by this Court.
8. Though much force was not put forth with regard to the liability, no
oral or documentary evidence was let in by the appellant/Insurance Company
to prove the liability on the part of the driver of the bus. The Tribunal has also
rightly fixed the liability on the driver of the tipper lorry and the same is
hereby confirmed.
9. Coming to the point of compensation awarded by the Tribunal it
is seen from Ex.P10-Discharge summary that the claimant sustained major
crush injury in the right elbow with compound lateral condyle humerus
fracture, radial head subluxation and loss of lateral joint ligament of elbow,
composite tissue loss from postero lateral aspect of right elbow and upper ¼ of
posterior forearm. The claimant underwent treatment as inpatient for 35 days
in a private hospital. Doctor opined that the claimant suffered 35% functional
disability. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, this
Court is of the opinion that Rs.3,000/- per disability would be just and fair and
the award under the head 'loss of future earning' has to be modified as
Rs.1,05,000/- (35 x 3000). The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- for pain and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
suffering and that has to be enhanced to Rs.50,000/- considering the nature of
injuries sustained by the claimant. The Tribunal has awarded only Rs.5,000/-
for extra-nourishment, which in the considered view of this Court, is meagre
and the same is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. This Court is of the view that the
compensation awarded under the head 'transportation', 'damages to clothes' and
'attender charges' are on the lesser side and the same have to be enhanced and
accordingly, this Court award a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards 'transportation'
and Rs.5,000/- towards 'damages to clothes' and Rs.15,000/- towards 'attender
charges'. For 'loss of amenities', the Tribunal has not awarded any amount.
This Court is of the view that Rs.30,000/- is a reasonable amount towards 'loss
of amenities' and the same is awarded by this Court. Since the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'medical bills' is based on medical
bills submitted by the claimant and the same is hereby confirmed.
Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as
follows:-
Sl. Head under which the Amount Amount now
No amount is awarded awarded by awarded by this
the Court (in Rs.)
Tribunal(in
Rs.)
1 Loss of future earnings Rs.3,02,400/- Rs.1,05,000/-
2 Pain and Suffering
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 50,000/-
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
Sl. Head under which the Amount Amount now
No amount is awarded awarded by awarded by this
the Court (in Rs.)
Tribunal(in
Rs.)
3 Medical expenses Rs.2,30,000/- Rs.2,30,000/-
4 Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 10,000/-
5 Transportation Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 10,000/-
6 Damages to clothes Rs. 1,000/- Rs. 5,000/-
7 Attendant charges Rs. 13,500/- Rs. 15,000/-
8 Loss of Amenities --- Rs. 30,000/-
Total Rs.5,73,900/- Rs.4,55,000/-
10. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed,
reducing the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal from
Rs.5,73,900/- to Rs.4,55,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifty Five Thousand
only), which carries interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition
till the date of deposit, except for the default period, if any. No costs in this
CMA. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11. It is represented that as per the order of this Court made in
M.P.No.1 of 2013 dated 23.07.2013, the appellant had deposited a sum of
Rs.4,00,000/- and the claimant was permitted to withdraw a sum of
Rs.2,00,000/-. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
award amount, as assessed by this Court, together with interest at 7.5% p.a.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
less the amount already deposited, to the credit of MACTOP No.161 of 2010
on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Court),
Bhavani, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to
transfer the award amount directly to the bank account of the claimant/first
respondent herein, through RTGS, within a period of two weeks thereafter.
mra 22.04.2021
To
1. The Subordinate Judge
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Bhavani.
2. The Section Officer
Vernacular Records Section
High Court, Madras.
S.KANNAMMAL, J
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No. 2031 of 2013
mra
CMA. No. 2031 of 2013
22.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
