Madras High Court
Palavesam vs Tamilselvan on 3 February, 2021
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.A(MD)No.688 of 2020
Palavesam ... Appellant / Petitioner
Vs.
1.Tamilselvan
2.The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Through its Divisional Manager,
IInd Floor, No.4, Promenade Road,
P.B.No.18, Cantonment,
Trichy ...Respondents / Respondents
[The first respondent exparte before the
Trial Court. Hence, notice may be dispensed
with]
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree made in
M.C.O.P.No.313 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, dated 26.07.2019.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Selvakumaran
For R-1 : No Appearance
For R-2 : Mr.K.Bhaskaran
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/9
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the
appellant/claimant against the award of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli made in M.C.O.P.No.
313 of 2016, dated 26.07.2019.
2. It is a case of injury sustained by the injured/claimant in an
accident, which took place on 24.12.2015 at 4.20 p.m., near Sengulam
branch road.
3. It is the case of the claimant before the Tribunal that when he
was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.TN 72 AK 8588 from
South to North on the Tirunelveli-Nagercoil National Highway, after
showing hand signal and the indicator, turned the vehicle towards left. At
that time, the first respondent car bearing registration No.TN 49 BY
1018, insured with the second respondent came behind of the motorcycle
in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the motorcycle from
behind and caused the accident. In the said accident, the injured
sustained grievous injuries.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
4. The claimant filed an application in M.C.O.P.No.313 of 2016 on
the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate
Court), Tirunelveli, seeking compensation.
5. Before the Tribunal, the appellant/claimant examined three
witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked 27 documents as
Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.27. The second respondent/Insurance Company examined
one witness as R.W.1 and did not marked any document before the
Tribunal.
6. The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and
documentary evidence and the arguments advanced on either side and
also appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred
only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car and
therefore, directed the second respondent/Insurance Company to pay a
sum of Rs.6,90,000/-, as compensation with interest at 9% per annum
from the date of petition to till the date of realization.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
7. Against which, the appellant/claimant filed this present appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation.
8.The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that
the victim sustained injuries and he was treated by P.Ws.2 and 3-
Doctors. The P.W2-Doctor on physical examination assessed the
disability at 61.2% and issued certificate on the basis of reports and
examination. However, based on Ex.P.14 disability certificate issued by
the TVMC Board Hospital, Tirunelveli, it was assessed that the
permanent disability with regard to the whole body is 50%. The learned
counsel for the appellant relied on the Judgment rendered in Sudeep.A.K
vs. General Manger, KSRTC & Ors., reported in 2019 (2) TN MAC 606
(DB) (Kar.), wherein the award of Rs.8,27,000/- was enhanced to Rs.
41,92,000/-
9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
materials placed before this Court.
10. Perusal of the record reveals that the injured/claimant has
suffered pain and permanent disability which continues his life causing
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
serious impact on the quality of life and his future is in peril.
Considering the fact that the disability is worse than that of a fatal
accident, as a victim, he has to eke out through out his life with the
permanent disability and hence, the injured claimant needs to be
compensated.
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Syed Sadiq vs. United India
Insurance Co.Ltd., reported in 2014 (1) TN MAC 459(SC), has fixed the
monthly income at Rs.6,500/- for a vegetable vendor where there was no
proof of income. In the present case on hand, during the time of accident,
the injured claimant eking out his life by running a tuition centre and
hence, it is reasonable to fix Rs.6,000/- as a monthly income and since
the age of the injured claimant was found to be 25 years, the appropriate
multiplier to be applied as per the Smt.Sarla Verma .vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation reported in 2009(2) TN MAC 1(SC) case, is '18' and
therefore, the loss of income would be Rs.6000/- + 50% X 12 X 18 = Rs.
6,80,000/- and therefore, the compensation awarded for loss of income is
enhanced to Rs.6,80,000/-.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
12. Further, the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only)
awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering, is on the lower side
and therefore, the same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees
One Lakh only).
13. Similarly, the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand
only) awarded by the Tribunal towards extra nourishment is on the lower
side and therefore, the same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) by this Court and the other heads are
confirmed.
14. In view of the settled position of law, this Court modifies the
award of the Tribunal by enhancing the compensation, as under:-
S.No Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. For permanent 2,00,000 6,80,000 enhanced
disability at Rs.
4000/-x50
2. Attendance 5,000 5,000
Charges
3. For pain and 30,000 1,00,000 enhanced
sufferings
4. Transport to 5,000 5,000
Hospital
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
5. For Extra 15,000 50,000 enhanced
Nourishment
6. Loss of 30,000 30,000
Convenience
7. Temporary loss 30,000 30,000
of income
8. Medical 3,75,000 3,75,000
Expenses
Total Rs.6,90,000 Rs.12,75,000 By enhancing a
sum of Rs.
5,85,000/-
15. In the result,
(i) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed, enhancing
the award of the Tribunal from Rs.6,90,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Ninety
Thousand only) to a sum of Rs.12,75,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs
Seventy Five Thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till date of realisation and proportionate
costs;
(ii) The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the entire award amount of Rs.12,75,000/- (Rupees Twelve
Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand only) with accrued interests and costs, less
the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
made, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award
amount, with accrued interests and costs, without filing any formal
application before the Tribunal. No Costs.
03.02.2021
pkn
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
To,
1.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli,
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD).No.688 of 2020
J.NISHA BANU,J.
pkn
C.M.A(MD)No.688 of 2020
03.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
