Madras High Court
Minor P.Kokila vs Babu Hussain on 2 December, 2021
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
C.M.A.(MD)No.184 of 2021
Minor P.Kokila
(Minor is represented through her
father and natural guardian
Padmanathan) :Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.Babu Hussain
2.The Branch Manager,
United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.7, West Veli Street,
Madurai. :Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to
allow this appeal and set aside the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.348
of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/IV Additional Sub-
Judge, Maudrai, dated 22.11.2017 and allow the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Vakeeswaran
For R1 : Given up
For R2 : Mr.N.Dilipkumar
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant to set aside the
judgment and decree dated 22.11.2017, passed in M.C.O.P.No.348 of 2015 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/IV Additional Sub-Judge, Maudrai.
2.The facts of the case is that the accident took place on 08.10.2010 at
about 11.00 when the minor appellant was walking on Kottampatti to Natham
road, a Maruti Omni Car bearing Registration No.TN-57-L-3616 driven by its
driver in a rash and negligent manner in the same direction, dashed against the
minor appellant. Due to which, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries.
Immediately, she was taken to Government Hospital, Melur and thereafter
admitted in Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, as inpatient from 08.10.2010 to
23.10.2010 and she continued her treatment as outpatient. Therefore, the
appellant/claimant filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.348 of 2015 before the
Tribunal seeking compensation for her injuries.
3.Before the Tribunal, on the side of the appellant/claimant two witnesses
were examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 and 7 documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.7
and on the side of the respondents no witness was examined and no document was
marked. One Court document was marked as Ex.C.1.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
4.The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidences and the arguments advanced on either side and also on appreciating the
evidences on record, held that the accident was occurred only due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the car and directed the second respondent to pay
compensation of Rs.76,050/-. Aggrieved over order of the Tribunal, the
appellant/claimant has filed the present C.M.A.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant contended that
the Medical Board ascertained 3% disability of the appellant/claimant for the
alleged accident, but, the Tribunal granted Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability
and awarded Rs.9,000/- towards partial permanent disability. He further contended
that as per Ex.C.1, the Medical Board gave permanent disability at 3% and not as
partial permanent disability. Hence, he prays to modify the award of the Tribunal.
6.As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
MASTER MALLIKARJUN -VS- DIVISONAL MANAGER, THE NATIONAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER, reported in 2013(0)
Supreme (SC) 780, wherein, in paragraph No.12 it is held as follows:
“12.Though it is difficult to have an accurate assessment
of the compensation in the case of children suffering disability
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
on account of a motor vehicle accident, having regard to the
relevant factors, precedents and the approach of various High
Courts, we are of the view that the appropriate compensation
on all other heads in addition to the actual expenditure for
treatment, attendant, etc., should be, if the disability is above
10% and upto 30% to the whole body, Rs.3 lakhs; upto 60%,
Rs.4 lakhs; upto 90% Rs.5 lakhs and above 90%, it should be
Rs.6 lakhs. For permanent disability upto 10%, it should be
Rs.1 lakh, unless there are exceptional circumstances to take
different yardstick.”
Since the minor child sustained 3% permanent disability and as per the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.1 lakh towards
permanent disability.
7.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to modify the award amount
towards permanent disability at Rs.1,00,000/- instead of Rs.9,000/-. On the other
aspects, the award of the Tribunal is confirmed.
8.In the result, this civil miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed and
the award amount is enhanced from Rs.76,050/- to Rs.1,67,050/- with interest at
the rate of 7.5% p.a. The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
deposit the enhanced award amount, after deducting the amount already deposited,
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Since
the appellant/claimant is a minor, the Tribunal is directed to deposit the entire
award amount in any one of the Nationalized Bank, till she attains majority. The
guardian of the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the interest amount
once in three months from the Bank and utilize the same for the welfare of he
child. No costs.
02.12.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
Ns
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/
IV Additional Sub-Judge,
Maudrai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.(MD)No.388 of 2020
S.ANANTHI, J.
Ns
C.M.A.(MD)No.184 of 2021
02.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
