Madras High Court
Divisional Manager vs Narayanan on 29 April, 2021
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
C.M.A.No.2906 of 2015
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.12-A, PLA Building, First floor, Kovai Road,
Karur – 639 002. ...Appellant
Vs
1.Narayanan
2.Subbathal
3.Bharathi
(1st respondent before the tribunal passed away
during trial. Hence he is not shown in the array of parties)
...Respondents
C.M.A.No.2907 of 2015
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.12-A, PLA Building, First floor, Kovai Road,
Karur – 639 002. ...Appellant
Vs
1.Ramesh
2.Subbathal
3.Bharathi
(1st respondent before the tribunal passed away
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
during trial. Hence he is not shown in the array of parties)
...Respondents
Prayer in CMA No.2906 of 2015: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and
judgment dated 29th day of October, 2014, made in M.C.O.P.No.278 of
2012, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District
Court), Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Vinod
For Respondents : Mr.T.Gobinathu for R1
R2 & R3 – unclaimed
Prayer in CMA No.2907 of 2015: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and
judgment dated 29th day of October, 2014, made in M.C.O.P.No.279 of
2012, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District
Court), Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Vinod
For Respondents : Mr.T.Gobinathu for R1
R2 & R3 – unclaimed
COMMON JUDGMENT
These appeals have been filed by the Insurance Company challenging
the quantum of compensation awarded to the respective claimants by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Court), Namakkal in
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
MCOP.No.278 of 2012 and MCOP.No.279 of 2012.
2.Since these appeals arise out of the very same accident, these
appeals are disposed of by a common judgment.
3.The details of the compensation awarded to the respective claimants
in MCOP.No.278 of 2012 and MCOP No.279 of 2012 are detailed
hereunder:
MCOP.No.278 of 2012 - corresponds to CMA No.2906 of 2015
Particulars Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of income 6,000x12x16x 5,18,400
Medical bills 97,568
Extra nourishment 10,000
Pain and suffering 50,000
Transportation 10,000
Attender charges 10,000
Loss of future prospects 20,000
Total Rs.7,15,968/-
The same is rounded off to Rs.7,16,000/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
MCOP.No.279 of 2012 corresponds to CMA No.2907 of 2015
Particulars Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of income 10,000x12x16x 7,68,000
Medical bills 78,447
Extra nourishment 10,000
Pain and suffering 50,000
Transportation 10,000
Attender charges 10,000
Loss of future prospects 20,000
Total Rs.9,46,447/-
The same is rounded off to Rs.9,46,400/-
4.The Appellant / Insurance Company has challenged the impugned
Award only on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded to the
respective claimants is excessive.
5.Insofar as MCOP No.278 of 2012 which corresponds to
CMA.No.2906 of 2015 is concerned, the claimant Narayanan sustained a
fracture on his left leg as well as his left hand as a result of an accident caused
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
by a vehicle on 09.12.2011 insured with the Appellant. The Doctor has
assessed the disability of the claimant Narayanan at 45%.
6.No evidence has been adduced by the claimant (Narayanan) before the
Tribunal to prove that due to the injuries sustained by him, he lost his future
earning capacity. The discharge summary and wound certificate as well as the
assessment made by the Doctor in the disability certificate also do not reveal
that the claimant (Narayanan) would have suffered loss of future earning
capacity as a result of injuries sustained by him.
7.Without any basis, the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier method for
assessing the disability compensation to the claimant (Narayanan) and without
there being any evidence available on record, that Narayanan (claimant) has
suffered loss of earning capacity.
8.This Court after giving due consideration to the nature of injuries
sustained by the claimant (Narayanan) and his avocation is of the considered
view that the Tribunal ought to have assessed the disability compensation only
on percentage basis and ought not to have adopted the multiplier method.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
Hence, this Court sets aside the compensation awarded by the claimant
(Narayanan) towards loss of earning capacity at Rs.5,18,400/- and instead
awards disability compensation of Rs.1,35,000/- calculated at Rs.3,000/- per
percentage of disability for the 45% disability suffered by the claimant
(Narayanan).
9.The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.97,568/- towards
medical expenses to the claimant (Narayanan) which is based on the medical
bills produced by the claimant and therefore, the same is confirmed by this
Court.
10.This Court also confirms the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
to the claimant (Narayanan) at Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering,
Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities as it is proportionate to the nature of
injuries sustained by the claimant. However, the Tribunal awarded a lesser
compensation to the claimant (Narayanan) under various other heads viz., extra
nourishment, transportation and attender charges which has to be enhanced by
this Court from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/-, Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- and
from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- respectively.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
11.The Tribunal has erroneously failed to Award any compensation
towards loss of income during the period of claimant's treatment, which he is
legally entitled to.
12.After giving due consideration to the nature of injuries and the
avocation of the claimant (Narayanan), this Court deems it fit to grant
compensation of Rs.60,000/- towards loss of income calculated at Rs.10,000/-
per month for a period of six months.
13.For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
to the claimant in MCOP.No.278 of 2012 who is the first respondent in
CMA.No.2906 of 2015 is reduced from Rs.7,16,000 to 4,07,600/- as detailed
hereunder:
Particulars Award Amount Reduced
(Rs.) Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of earning capacity 5,18,400 -
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
Particulars Award Amount Reduced
(Rs.) Amount
(Rs.)
Disability (45%) - 1,35,000
Medical bills 97,568 97,568
Extra nourishment 10,000 15,000
Pain and suffering 50,000 50,000
Transportation 10,000 15,000
Attender charges 10,000 15,000
Loss of amenities 20,000 20,000
Loss of income - 60,000
(10,000 x6)
Total Rs.7,15,968/- Rs.4,07,568/-
The same is rounded off to Rs.7,16,000/- Rs.4,07,600/-
14.Insofar as the compensation awarded to the claimant in
MCOP.No.279 of 2012 which corresponds to CMA.No.2907 of 2015 is
concerned, this Court is of the considered view that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is excessive and has to be reduced for the following reasons:
(a)The claimant Ramesh sustained both bone fracture on his right leg.
(b)No evidence has been adduced by the claimant Ramesh before the
Tribunal to prove that due to the injuries sustained by him, he has lost his future
earning capacity as a result of an accident.
(c)The claimant (Ramesh) claims to be a Software Engineer but no
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
document was produced before the Tribunal in support of his avocation.
15.The Tribunal has fixed the monthly income of Ramesh on notional
basis at Rs.10,000/-. The discharge summary and the wound certificate which
were marked as Exhibits before the Tribunal also do not reveal that the
claimant (Ramesh) would have suffered loss of earning capacity as a result of
the injuries sustained by him.
16.Without any basis, the Tribunal has awarded a huge compensation of
Rs.7,68,000/- to the claimant (Ramesh) and therefore, the same will have to be
set aside by this Court and instead the claimant (Ramesh) will have to be
awarded compensation towards his disability only on percentage basis. The
Doctor has assessed the disability of the claimant (Ramesh) at 40%.
17.The accident happened on 09.12.2011. After giving due
consideration to the year of the accident, this Court fixes the disability
compensation of the claimant (Ramesh) at Rs.1,20,000/- calculated at
Rs.3,000-/ per percentage of disability for the 40% disability.
18.The Tribunal has rightly awarded a compensation of Rs.78,447/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
towards medical expenses based on the medical bills produced by the claimant
(Ramesh).
19.The Tribunal has also rightly awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/-
towards pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities, which is also
confirmed by this Court.
20.However, the Tribunal has awarded a lesser compensation towards
extra nourishment, transportation and attender charges which has to be
necessarily enhanced after giving due consideration to the nature of injuries
sustained by the claimant (Ramesh). Accordingly, this Court enhances the
compensation towards extra nourishment from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.20,000/-,
towards transportation from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.20,000/- and towards attender
charges from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.20,000/-.
21.The Tribunal also erroneously failed to Award any compensation
towards loss of income to the claimant (Ramesh) during the period of his
treatment. After giving due consideration to the nature of injuries sustained by
the claimant (Ramesh), this Court is of the considered view that atleast for a
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
period of six months, the claimant (Ramesh) would not have been able to do his
regular employment. Hence, this Court Awards a compensation of Rs.72,000/-
to the claimant (Ramesh) towards loss of income calculated at Rs.12,000/- per
month for a period of six months.
22.For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
under the impugned Award who is the claimant in MCOP.No.279 of 2012
which corresponds to MCOP.No.2907 of 2015 is reduced from Rs.9,46,400/-
to Rs.3,73,400/-as detailed hereunder:
Particulars Award Amount Reduced
(Rs.) Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of earning capacity 7,68,000 -
Disability (40%) - 1,20,000
Medical bills 78,447 78,447
Extra nourishment 10,000 15,000
Pain and suffering 50,000 50,000
Transportation 10,000 15,000
Attender charges 10,000 15,000
Loss of amenities 20,000 20,000
Loss of income - 60,000
(10,000 x6)
Total Rs.9,46,447/- Rs.3,73,477/-
The same is rounded off to Rs.9,46,400/- Rs.3,73,400/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
23.In the result, both appeals are partly allowed. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal in MCOP.No.278 of 2012 is reduced to Rs.4,07,600/-
from Rs.7,16,000 /- along with interest and costs assessed by the Tribunal as
well as the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MCOP.No.279 of 2012 is
reduced to Rs.3,73,400/- from Rs.9,46,400/- along with interest and costs as
fixed by the Tribunal.
24. The Appellant Insurance company is directed to deposit the
modified compensation amount of Rs.4,07,600 /- together with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum as assessed by the Tribunal from the date of
claim till the date of deposit, after deducting the amount already deposited if
any to the credit of MCOP.No.278 of 2012 and also directed to deposit
another sum of Rs.3,73,400 /- as compensation together with interest at the
rate of 7.5% per annum as assessed by the Tribunal from the date of claim
till the date of deposit, after deducting the amount already deposited if any
to the credit of MCOP.No.279 of 2012 within a period of four weeks from
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
the date of receipt of a copy of this common judgment. On such deposit
being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the amount lying to the credit of
MCOP.No.278 of 2012 to the bank account of the first respondent/claimant
in CMA.No.2905 of 2015 and and also transfer the amount lying to the
credit of MCOP.No.279 of 2012 to the bank account of the claimant/first
respondent in CMA.No.2907 of 2015 through RTGS within a period of one
week thereafter.
25. If the Appellant Insurance company has already deposited the
compensation amount before the Tribunal, they are permitted to withdraw the
excess amount if any, deposited by them before the Tribunal by filing an
appropriate application. No costs.
29.04.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
pam
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
pam
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Additional District Court), Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
C.M.A.Nos.2906 and 2907 of 2015
29.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
