Madras High Court
K.Subramani vs D.T.Dhinakaran on 29 April, 2021
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
K.Subramani .. Appellant
Vs.
1. D.T.Dhinakaran
[R1-Already set exparte in Lower Court]
[R1-Notice may be Dispense with]
2. The Chairman and Managing Director,
United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
No.24, Whites Road, Chennai-14. ... Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Decree and Award dated 22.10.2016
passed in M.C.O.P.No.4453 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.Maithri Mahalingam
For Respondents : Ms.K.Saraswathi (R2)
R1-Exparte vide on batta.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted vide award dated 22.10.2016 made in
M.C.O.P.No.4453 of 2000 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The claimant, aged 23 years, a shoes salesman, earning a sum of
Rs.200/- per day met with an accident on 24.06.1999, due to which he
sustained grievous injuries. Hence, he filed a claim petition, in
M.C.O.P.No.4453 of 2000, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II
Small Causes Court), Chennai, seeking compensation for a sum of
Rs.5,00,000/-.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the van belonging to 1st respondent and directed the second
respondent/Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.1,35,000/- (Rupees One
Lakh Thirty Five Thousand) as compensation to the appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellant has come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that
P.W.3- the Doctor, after examining the claimant assessed the disability as
40%, but the Tribunal has taken the disability only @ 35%. He further
submitted that when the Tribunal has not adopted the multiplier method,
while determining the compensation, it ought to have taken the entire 40%
disability as assessed by the Doctor, but taking 35% disability for the purpose
of awarding compensation towards disability, is not proper. He further
submitted that though the injuries sustained by the claimant are grievous in
nature, which requires treatment for certain period, no compensation was
awarded by the Tribunal towards future medical expenses. He further
submitted that attender charges awarded by the tribunal is very low and the
same needs to be enhanced.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent/Insurance company submitted that the the tribunal, on going
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
through the entire materials on record had determined the disability at 30%,
which is proper and the same does not warrant interference. He further
submitted that the tribunal, on considering the nature of injuries sustained by
the claimant awarded compensation towards attender charges, which is
correct and further the tribunal had awarded compensation towards medical
expenses and hence there is no need to compensation towards future medical
expenses
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials on record.
8. Considering the overall materials available on record and
submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court
is of the view that the Tribunal has not adopted the multiplier method for
awarding the compensation towards disability, the Court should have taken
the total disability assessed by the Doctor for the purpose of awarding
lumpsum amount of compensation. Therefore, this Court is inclined to take
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
disability @ 40% and taking 2,000/- per percentage of disability, the total
amount comes to Rs.80,000/- (2000x40) and hence a sum of Rs.80,000/- is
awarded towards disability. Since, no compensation was awarded towards
future medical expenses, a sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under this head.
Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, the attender
charges awarded by the tribunal at Rs.1,300/- is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-.
Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
S. Description Amount Amount awarded by this Court
N awarded by (Rs)
o Tribunal
(Rs)
1. Transportation, 10,000/- 10,000/-
nourish food and
miscellaneous
expenditure
2. Medical expenses 6,700/- 6,700/-
3. Attender charges 1,300/- 10,000/-
4. Disability 70,000/- 80,000/-
5. Loss of earning 12,000 12,000/-
during treatment
period
6. Damages for pain, 25,000 25,000/-
suffering and
Trauma
7. Loss of amenities 10,000 10,000/-
8. Future medical NIL 20,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
S. Description Amount Amount awarded by this Court
N awarded by (Rs)
o Tribunal
(Rs)
expenses
Total Rs.1,35,000/- Rs.1,73,700/-
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs1,35,000/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.1,73,700/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from
the date of petition till the date of realisation. The appellant/claimant shall
pay necessary Court fee, if any, on the enhanced compensation. The second
respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced award
amount along with interest and costs now determined by this Court, less the
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is
permitted to withdraw the entire award amount, along with interest and costs,
less the amount if any, already withdrawn. The Tribunal is directed to transfer
the entire award amount to the appellant by way of RTGS, within a period of
three weeks from the deposit or from the date of receipt of the Bank details
obtained for the claimant or application made by the appellant for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
withdrawal, whichever is later. No costs.
29.04.2021
arr
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Chairman and Managing Director,
United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
No.24, Whites Road, Chennai-14.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
3.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
arr
C.M.A.No.1772 of 2017
29.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
