Madras High Court
M/S.Reliance General Insurance ... vs S.Gowtham on 6 December, 2021
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
M/s.Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
No.408, Third Floor,
Perundurai Road, Erode. .. Appellant
Vs.
1.S.Gowtham
2.P.Vasanthi .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
01.09.2017 made in M.C.O.P.No.708 of 2012 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court No.1, Salem.
For Appellant : M/s.M.B.Gopalan Associates
For R1 : Mr.T.S.Arthanareeswaran
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through “Video Conferencing/Hybrid mode”.
2.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the award
dated 01.09.2017 made in M.C.O.P.No.708 of 2012 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court No.1, Salem.
3.The appellant is the 2nd respondent in M.C.O.P.No.708 of 2012 on
the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court
No.1, Salem. The 1st respondent filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of
Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the
accident that took place on 02.01.2012.
4.According to 1st respondent, on 02.01.2012 at about 02.30 P.M.,
while he was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 25 L 7315 to
give mid day meals to his father at his place near Perumal Koil Malai
Adivaram, Sembankadu, Trichengodu, the driver of the tipper Lorry bearing
Registration No.TN 48 P 8687, owned by 2nd respondent, drove the same in a
rash and negligent manner and dashed against the 1st respondent due to which
the 1st respondent fell down from the motorcycle and sustained grievous
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
injuries. Therefore, the 1st respondent filed the claim petition, claiming a sum
of Rs.30,00,000/- as compensation, against the 2nd respondent and the
appellant-Insurance Company, being the owner and insurer of the tipper
Lorry respectively.
5.The 2nd respondent, owner of the tipper Lorry, remained exparte
before the Tribunal.
6.The appellant/Insurance Company filed a counter statement denying
the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the claimant was
minor at the time of accident and he drove the motorcycle without a valid
driving licence. He further contended that the injured claimant suddenly
turned the motorcycle without blowing a horn. Therefore, the first respondent
has to prove his age, income, nature of injuries, medical expenses incurred
due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident by producing documentary
evidence. In any event, the total amount claimed as compensation is highly
excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
7.Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent examined himself as P.W.1
and marked 15 documents as Exs.P1 to P15. The appellant, did not let in any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
oral or documentary evidence before the Tribunal. In addition to that, Ex.C1
and Ex.C2 were marked as Court documents.
8.The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent
driving of the tipper Lorry bearing Registration No. TN 48 P 8687, owned by
the 2nd respondent and therefore directed the appellant/Insurance Company to
pay a sum of Rs.8,65,679/- as compensation to the 1st respondent.
9.To set aside the said award dated 01.09.2017 made in
M.C.O.P.No.708 of 2012, the appellant has come up with the present appeal.
10.Questioning the quantum of the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the
Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record and
held that the accident had occurred only due to the negligence of the tipper
lorry and thus, erroneously fixed the liability on the appellant. He would
further contend that the Tribunal has also failed to appreciate that there could
be no permanent loss of income due to the injuries sustained by the injured
and wrongly adopted the multiplier method. He also pointed out that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
Tribunal has erroneously awarded towards loss of earning and on other heads
excessively. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellant seeks to set aside
the award passed by the Tribunal.
11.On a perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal, it appears that the
Tribunal has considered each and every aspect as regards the occurrence of
the accident, grievous injuries sustained by the injured and various other
aspects and has rightly awarded the compensation. In fact, the Tribunal has
considered the fact that there was no evidence adduced on behalf of the
appellant to prove that the accident had not occured due to the negligent on
the part of the driver of the tipper lorry and as such, the Tribunal has rightly
fixed the liability on the 2nd respondent and the appellant/Insurance Company.
As regards the injuries sustained by the 1st respondent and he was the
Medical Board, where it was assessed that the first respondent has sustained
60% disability. While so, the Tribunal has fixed only 40% disability and
therefore, this Court does not find any infirmity to reduce further. Though the
injured claimant was minor at the time of accident, the Tribunal, considering
the fact that due to the injuries sustained by him, he would not be in a
position to earn, fixed a sum of Rs.7,000/- per month as monthly income of
the injured/claimant to meet the ends of justice and thus, calculated the loss of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
income by adopting multiplier method and arrived at Rs.6,04,800/-, which, in
the opinion of this Court, just and proper and does not require any
interference. As regards the compensation awarded under various heads,
including medical expenses, the Tribunal has rightly awarded just
compensation which also cannot be interfered with. For the forgoing reasons,
this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by the
Tribunal.
12.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and a sum
of Rs.8,65,679/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the 1st
respondent, along with interest and costs, is confirmed. The appellant-
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount, along with
interest and costs, less the amount if any already deposited, within a period of
six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.708 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Special Subordinate Court No.1, Salem. On such deposit, the 1st respondent is
permitted to withdraw the award amount along with interest and costs, after
adjusting the amount if any already withdrawn, by filing necessary
application before the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected
CMP.No.13184 of 2018 is also closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
06.12.2021
gbi
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Special Subordinate Court No.1,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Salem.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
S.KANNAMMAL, J.
gbi
C.M.A.No.1688 of 2018
06.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
