Madras High Court
New India Assurance Co. vs M.Priya on 28 April, 2021
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
CMA.No.801 of 2015
New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,
Motor Third Party Claims Hub,
No.45, Moore Street, 5th Floor,
Chennai – 600 001. ... Appellant
..Vs..
1.M.Priya
(Declare as major as per order in
M.P.No.736 of 2014 dated
04.03.2014)
2.K.Sree Ramulu Naidu ... Respondents
CMA.No.1654 of 2015
M.Priya ... Appellant
..Vs..
1.K.Sree Ramulu Naidu
2.New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,
Motor Third Party Claims Hub,
No.45, Moore Street, 5th Floor,
Chennai – 600 001. ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Common Judgment and Decree
passed in MCOP.No.1978 of 2012 on 31.10.2014 on the file of the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Small Causes Court – II Judge) at
Chennai District.
For Appellant in
CMA.No.801 of 2015
& R2 in CMA.No.1654
of 2015 : Mr.J.Chandran
For R1 in CMA.No.801 of 2015
& Appellant in CMA.No.
1654 of 2015 : Mr.F.Terry Chella Raja
COMMON JUDGMENT
CMA.No.801 of 2015 has been filed by the Insurance Company and
CMA.No.1654 of 2015 has been filed by the claimant challenging the very
same Award dated 31.10.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Small Causes Court, Chennai) in MCOP.No.1978 of 2012.
2. Heard Mr.F.Terry Chella Raja, learned counsel for the claimants
and Mr.J.Chandran, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance company.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
3. The Insurance company has filed the appeal challenging the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas the claimant
has filed the appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation. The details
of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned Award
are as follows:
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of earning capacity 12,96,000/-
(10000 x 12 x 18 x
60%)
Transportation 15,000/-
Extra nourishment 25,000/-
Damage to clothes 1,000/-
Medical expenses 2,00,000/-
Attender charges 15,000/-
Pain and suffering 50,000/-
Loss of Amenities of life 35,000/-
Loss of prospects of marriage 75,000/-
Total 17,12,000/-
4. The claimant who is the appellant in CMA.No.1654 of 2015 was a
XIth standard student when the accident happened on 02.03.2012. At the
time of accident, she was aged 16 years and sustained the following injuries
viz., (a) Fracture occipital bone, (b) Fracture of right temporal bone of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
skull, (c) Mid ear fluid, (d) Sun Arachnoid hemorrhage, (e) Intersphericle
Hemorrhage, (f) Hemorrhage contusion brain right and left frontal bone, (g)
Post traumatic scqulae head ache, (h) Giddiness fainting attach, (i) Memory
deficit (M2), (j) Right and left hand and leg power 4/5 because of bifrontal
lobe affection and (k) Multiple injuries all over the body. The Doctor (PW2)
who examined her has assessed the permanent disability of the claimant at
90%. However, the Tribunal for the purpose of assessing the compensation
towards loss of earning capacity fixed the disability of the claimant at 60%.
This Court after giving due consideration to the nature of injuries sustained
by the claimant is of the considered view that the assessment of disability
made by the Tribunal under the impugned Award is a correct assessment
and does not call for any interference.
5. The Tribunal has adopted the multiplier method for assessing the
loss of earning power of the claimant. Based on the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Megala vs. Malathi and another reported in
2014 ACJ page 1441 the Tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income of
the claimant at Rs.10,000/-. In the above referred case also, the claimant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
was a student and therefore, this Court is of the considered view that
assessment of notional monthly income of the claimant at Rs.10,000/- by the
Tribunal cannot be considered to be excessive as alleged by the Insurance
Company. The nature of injuries sustained by the claimant has not been
disputed by the insurance company as seen from the evidence available on
record.
6. In order to prove her injuries, the claimant has also filed initial
treatment record, discharge summary, medical prescriptions, hospital bills,
disability certificate, C.T.Brain report, X-ray with report and Audiogram
report before the Tribunal which were marked as exhibits. On the side of the
insurance company, neither any document was filed nor any witness
examined to disprove the nature of injuries pleaded by the claimant before
the Tribunal.
7. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the claimant has also
filed a notarized affidavit today stating that even now she is unemployed
due to the injuries sustained by her as a result of the accident caused by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
vehicle insured with the Appellant in CMA.No.801 of 2015.
8. The Tribunal under the impugned award has awarded a
compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards transportation, Rs.25,000/- towards
extra nourishment, Rs.1,000/- towards damage to clothes, Rs.2,00,000/-
towards medical expenses which are supported by bills, Rs.15,000/- towards
attender charges, Rs.35,000/- towards loss of amenities of life, Rs.75,000/-
towards loss of prospects of marriage and Rs.50,000/- pain and suffering,
apart from awarding a compensation of Rs.12,96,000/- towards loss of
earning power which in the considered view of this Court cannot be
considered to be excessive as alleged by the Insurance Company.
9. The claimant has also filed a separate appeal in CMA.No.1654 of
2015 seeking for enhancement. According to her, the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and is not a just
compensation. However, considering the fact that the Tribunal has assessed
the compensation only after giving due consideration to the nature of
injuries sustained by the claimant based on the disability certificate issued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
by the Doctor, this Court is of the considered view that the contention of the
claimant seeking for enhancement has to be rejected. Further, the Tribunal
has fixed the notional monthly income of the claimant at Rs.10,000/-
despite the fact that she was only a XIth standard student at the time of the
accident. However, after giving due consideration to the overall
compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant, this Court is of the
considered view that there is no scope for interference as the said
compensation is a just compensation.
10. For the foregoing reasons, the Appeals filed by the Insurance
company as well as the claimant does not deserve any merit and
accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed. The Insurance Company,
Appellant in CMA.No.801 of 2015 is directed to deposit the entire award
amount along with interest from the date of claim till the date of deposit and
costs as assessed by the Tribunal, after deducting the amount already
deposited if any to the credit of MCOP.No.1978 of 2012 within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such
deposit being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the amount lying to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
credit of MCOP.No.1978 of 2012 to the bank account of the claimant who
is the Appellant in CMA.No.1654 of 2015 through RTGS within a period of
one week thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed, if any.
28.04.2021
nl
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
To
1. The IInd Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
nl
C.M.A.Nos.801 & 1654 of 2015
28.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
