Madras High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Mr.R.Ramanna on 29 April, 2021
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 29.04.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
No.45, Moore Street, Chennai-1. .. Appellant
Vs.
1. Mr.R.Ramanna
2. Mr.K.Boopathy .. Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, against the Award and decree dated 30.07.2014 made in
M.C.O.P.No.3351 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal (V Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
For appellant : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy
For respondents : Mr.V.Mohan Choudary for R-1
R-2 set ex-parte before the Tribunal
Page No.1/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Subbiah, J)
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company as against the Award
dated 30.07.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.3351 of 2009 on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Vth Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
2. The first respondent in this appeal is the claimant before the
Tribunal. According to the first respondent/claimant, he along with two
other persons, by name Rajagopal and Eronimus, travelled in a Bolero Car
bearing Registration No.TN.09.AQ.4467 on 17.04.2019. While so
travelling, at about 14.40 hours, a private bus bearing Registration No.TN-
67-F-3399 belonging to the second respondent herein and insured with the
appellant/Insurance Company, came in a rash and negligent manner and hit
the car and thus, caused the accident. In the said accident, all the three who
were travelling in the said car, had sustained injuries. Hence, three separate
claim petitions have been filed before the Tribunal, claiming compensation
by the respective injured-victims. The first respondent herein filed
M.C.O.P.No.3351 of 2009 claiming compensation of Rs.2,80,00,000/-.
Page No.2/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
3. The claim petition was resisted by the Insurance Company by filing
detailed counter statement, denying the age, occupation, etc., of the
claimant/injured.
4. The Tribunal had conducted joint trial in all the three claim
petitions and came to the conclusion that the accident is the result of the
rash and negligent driving of the private bus bearing Registration No.TN-
67-F-3399, owned by the second respondent and insured with the
appellant/Insurance Company. By coming to such conclusion, the Tribunal
passed a common Award in respect of all the claim petitions, awarding
respective compensation amounts and in the present claim petition which is
under challenge in this appeal, a compensation of Rs.2,49,44,000/- was
awarded.
5. In order to prove the claim, on the side of the first
respondent/claimant, he examined himself as P.W.3 in the joint trial, apart
from P.Ws.1,2 and 4 to 7 were also examined. Exs.P-1 to P-87 were marked
on the side of the claimants in the joint trial. On the side of the Insurance
Company, neither any oral evidence was adduced, nor any documentary
evidence was marked.
Page No.3/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
6. The Tribunal held that the accident is the result of rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the bus and thus passed respective Awards
of compensation in each of the claim petition. In the claim petition under
this appeal, Rs.2,49,44,000/- was awarded, i.e. in M.C.O.P.No.3351 of 2009
as against the claim of Rs.2,80,00,000/-. The break-up details of the
amounts awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are follows:
Sl. Heads under which the amounts are Amount awarded
No. awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.)
1 Loss of income for 12 months 8,97,800
2 Transportation 1,50,000
3 Flight charges 36,300
4 Extra-nourishment 3,00,000
5 Attender charges 6,50,000
6 Medical expenses 50,00,000
7 Physiotherapy treatment 4,40,500
8 Future medical treatment 3,00,000
9 Pain and suffering 3,00,000
10 Disability at 90% at the rate of
Rs.2,000/- per percentage 1,80,000
11 Loss of amenities 3,00,000
12 Compensation for shortening of life 50,000
13 Loss of earning capacity 1,63,39,200
Total 2,49,43,800
rounded off to
Page No.4/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
Sl. Heads under which the amounts are Amount awarded
No. awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.)
Rs.2,49,44,000/-
7. The only submission of the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/Insurance Company is that, it is no doubt true that on account of
the accident, the injure-victim (first respondent-claimant) had sustained
grievous injuries. He had sustained multiple fracture on the spinal cord and
all his organs beneath his leg were paralysed and he has become totally bed-
ridden. Though the first respondent/claimant is entitled for a reasonable
compensation in proportion to the nature of the disability suffered by him,
in the present case, the Tribunal had passed exorbitant sum under each
heads without assigning any proper reasonings and hence, the amounts
awarded under all the heads need proper reduction.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent/claimant submitted that the claimant was working as Senior
Manager (PMC) in IVRCL Infrastructures and Projects Limited in Chennai
and earning a sum of Rs.55,500/- per month, and now that, he had become
totally bed-ridden throughout his life, due to the accident and that without
Page No.5/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
the assistance of a third person, he cannot carry on his life. Under such
circumstances, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under all the heads are
reasonable and therefore, there is no need for reduction of the amounts and
the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/claimant therefore
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
9. Keeping in mind the submissions made on either side, we have
carefully gone through the entire materials available on record.
10. Considering the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant
and the nature of disability suffered by him, appropriate compensation has
to be determined. At the same time, we find that, as contended by the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company, the
Tribunal had awarded exorbitant sum under some heads and the same needs
proper reduction.
11. So far as the loss of earning capacity is concerned, the Tribunal
took the earning of the claimant per month at Rs.74,813/- and adding 30%
towards future prospects, the Tribunal determined the actual earning at
Rs.97,257/-, based on which, the annual income was calculated at
Rs.11,67,084/-. The multiplier that was applied in this case is "14" being
Page No.6/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
the age of the injured at the time of accident was 44 years. Thereafter, the
loss of earning was arrived at by the Tribunal at Rs.1,63,39,176/-, which
was rounded off by the Tribunal to Rs.1,63,39,200/-, by fixing the disability
at 100%.
12. On a perusal of the documents, we find that a sum of Rs.6,000/- in
the monthly income of Rs.74,813/- is conveyance reimbursement (voucher
payment), and therefore, the said sum cannot be taken as a component of the
monthly income and therefore, the said sum of Rs.6,000/- has to be
deducted from Rs.74,813/- and if so deducted, the monthly income would
be Rs.68,813/-. Thus, the monthly income is fixed at Rs.68,813/-.
Considering the age of the injured, who was 44 years at the time of accident,
the Tribunal ought to have added only 25% towards future prospects,
whereas the Tribunal added 30% towards future prospects. Hence, by
adding 25% towards future prospects, the actual monthly income works out
to Rs.86,016/- (68,813 + 25% of 68,813). The annual loss of income works
out to Rs.10,32,192/- (86,016 x 12). If 20% is deducted towards the Income
Tax, the resultant amount is Rs.8,25,754/-, which is the actual annual loss of
income. If "14" multiplier is applied, the loss of income is arrived at
Page No.7/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
Rs.1,15,60,556/- (8,25,754 x 14). Accordingly, the sum of Rs.1,63,39,200/-
awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of earning capacity, is hereby reduced
to Rs.1,15,60,556/-.
13. Further, we find that the Tribunal had awarded Rs.8,97,800/-
under the head "loss of income for 12 months" (74,813 x 12) (8,97,750/-
rounded off to Rs.8,97,800/-). In our considered opinion, since 100% is
disability is taken into consideration for multiplier method, the award of
Rs.8,97,800/- separately for the loss of income for one year, is not
sustainable and the same is set aside.
14. Further, we find that the Tribunal had awarded Rs.50,00,000/-
towards medical expenses. Actually, the medical bills marked on the side of
the claimant as exhibits, totally amounts only to Rs.46,10,176/-. Therefore,
we are of the opinion that the sum of R.50,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
towards medical expenses, is not proper. Further, we find that out of
Rs.46,10,176/-, Rs.11,77,468/- had been reimbursed by the employer.
Therefore, Rs.11,77,468/- has to be deducted from Rs.46,10,176/- and if so
deducted, the actual amount incurred for medical expenses is only
Rs.34,32,708/-. The same is hereby rounded off to Rs.35,00,000/-. Hence,
Page No.8/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- awarded towards medical expenses, is hereby
reduced to Rs.35,00,000/-.
15. The sum of Rs.3,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards future
medical expenses, is hereby reduced to Rs.2,00,000/-.
16. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards transportation
and apart from this, the Tribunal has also awarded Rs.36,300/- towards
flight charges from Kovilpatti Hospital to Chennai. We set aside the said
amount of Rs.36,300/- under the said head and consequently, we award
consolidated sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards transportation charges, inclusive
of flight charges.
17. Further, we find that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,00,000/-
towards extra-nourishment and the said amount is reduced to Rs.1,00,000/-.
18. Except the above modification, the amounts awarded by the
Tribunal under the other heads are confirmed.
19. Consequently, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal in
comparison with the amounts awarded by this Court, are tabulated
hereunder:
Page No.9/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
Amounts Amounts
Sl. Heads under which the awarded (in Rs.) awarded (in Rs.)
No. amounts are awarded by the Tribunal by this Court
1 Loss of income 8,97,800 -
2 Transportation 1,50,000 2,00,000
3 Flight charges 36,300 -
4 Extra-nourishment 3,00,000 1,00,000
5 Attender charges 6,50,000 6,50,000
6 Medical expenses 50,00,000 35,00,000
7 Physiotherapy treatment 4,40,500 4,40,500
8 Future medical 3,00,000 2,00,000
treatment
9 Pain and suffering 3,00,000 3,00,000
10 Disability 1,80,000 1,80,000
11 Loss of amenities 3,00,000 3,00,000
12 Compensation for 50,000 50,000
shortening of life
13 Loss of earning capacity 1,63,39,200 1,15,60,556
2,49,43,800 1,74,81,056
Total rounded off to rounded off to
Rs.2,49,44,000/- Rs.1,75,00,000/-
20. Thus, the present appeal filed by the Insurance Company is partly
allowed. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.2,49,44,000/- is hereby reduced to Rs.1,75,00,000/- (Rupees one crore
seventy five lakhs only) with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
Page No.10/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
claim petition till the date of deposit. Further we find that, pursuant to the
interim direction given by this Court in C.M.P.No.1811 of 2017 in
C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.14354 of 2016, by order dated
13.03.2017, the Insurance Company had deposited Rs.1,75,00,000/- with
interest @ 7.5% per annum, before the Tribunal. Therefore, the first
respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the said sum with accrued
interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, after adjusting the amount, if
any already withdrawn by the claimant. There shall be no order as to costs
in the present appeal.
(R.P.S.J) (S.K.J)
29.04.2021
Index: Yes/no
Speaking Order: Yes
cs
Page No.11/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Vth Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
Page No.12/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Judgment dated 29.04.2021
in C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
R.SUBBIAH, J
and
S.KANNAMMAL, J
cs
C.M.A.No.1990 of 2016
29.04.2021
Page No.13/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
