Madras High Court
M.Moorthy vs A.Mahaboob Ali on 5 February, 2021
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05.02.2021
Coram:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
and
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
M.Moorthy, S/o Manikkam ..
Appellant
Vs.
1. A.Mahaboob Ali, S/o Ahamed Husain
2. The Manager,
TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd.,
Penininsula Corporate Park,
Nicolex Piramal Tower, 9th Floor,
Ganapatrao Kadam Marg,
Lower Peral, Mumbai-400 013. ..
Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (CMA) filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act against the order and decree dated 16.04.2019 passed in
M.C.O.P.No.158 of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal/Additional District and Sessions Court, Krishnagiri.
Page No.1/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
For appellant : Mr.K.Kannan
For respondents: Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam for R-2
R-1 set ex-parte before the Tribunal
JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Subbiah, J)
Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by
the Tribunal, in and by award dated 16.04.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.158
of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional
District and Sessions Court, Krishnagiri, the present appeal has been filed
by the Claimant. Since the present appeal has been filed only to enhance the
compensation amount, we are not dealing with the other aspects of the
award passed by the Tribunal.
2. It is the case of the appellant/injured-victim before the Tribunal
that on account of the accident that had occurred on 05.03.2013 at about 15
hours near narrow bridge in Othipuram--Thaggatti Road, involving the
vehicle belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second
respondent-Insurance Company, he had sustained "comminuted fracture of
multiple metatarsais as well as calcaneum, leg amputation, right hip fracture
Page No.2/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
and injury on the right hand". For such injuries, he had taken treatment at
SPASH hospital, Bangalore, where he was admitted as an in-patient.
Further, during treatment, on 07.03.2013, "re-debridement of Stump wound
and revision above knee amputation", was done. After treatment, he was
discharged, but he continued further treatment in a private hospital at
Bangalore and Hosur. Hence, he made a claim of compensation in a sum of
Rs.40 lakhs, as against which, the Tribunal had awarded only Rs.5,31,720/-.
3. Before the Tribunal, common evidence was let-in in
M.C.O.P.Nos.158 and 159 of 2019. In order to prove their case, on behalf of
the appellant/claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and P.Ws.1 to 13 were
marked. On behalf of the second respondent-Insurance Company, R.Ws.1
and 2 were examined and Exs.R-1 to R-4 were marked. Exs.C-1 and C-2
were marked as Court documents.
4. The Tribunal, on an analysis of the entire evidence available on
record, by common award in M.C.O.P.Nos.158 and 159 of 2019, awarded a
compensation of Rs.5,31,720/- in M.C.O.P.No.158 of 2019, which is the
one challenged in the present appeal. The break-up details of the amounts
awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.158 of 2019 are as follows:
Page No.3/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
Sl.No. Head under which the amount is Amount awarded by
awarded the Tribunal
1 Disability 2,10,000
2 Medical bills 1,91,720
3 Future medical treatment 50,000
4 Pain and suffering 50,000
5 Transportation charges, nutrition and
attender charges 30,000
6 Loss of amenities -
Total 5,31,720
5. It is the main contention of the learned counsel appearing for
the appellant/claimant that, on account of the accident, he had sustained
multiple injuries. Further, the Tribunal had taken the disability at 70%
based on the disability certificate Ex.C-1. However, the Tribunal, instead of
awarding compensation under the head "disability" by applying multiplier
method, granted only a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- by awarding Rs.3,000/- per
percentage for 70% disability. The learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/claimant further submitted that, considering the nature of
disability, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,10,000/- under
the head "disability" is extremely on the lower side and he prayed that by
Page No.4/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
adopting multiplier method, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under the
head "disability" may be enhanced.
6. Countering the above submissions, it is submitted by the
learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/Insurance Company
that, at the time of accident, the appellant/claimant was working as Machine
Operator in M/s.Ashok Leyland Company at Hosur. The claimant had
admitted in his evidence that even after the accident, he is continuing his
avocation, and hence, the question of awarding compensation under the
head "disability" by resorting to multiplier method, does not arise. Therefore,
the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/Insurance
Company prayed for confirmation of the award amount passed by the
Tribunal.
7. Keeping in mind the submissions made on either side, we have
carefully perused the entire materials available on record.
8. We find that on account of the accident, the claimant had
suffered multiple injuries as stated supra. Considering the nature of injuries
sustained by him, we are of the opinion that the appellant/claimant is finding
it somewhat difficult even now to carry out his normal avocation as he was
Page No.5/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
doing before the accident. At the same time, it is admitted that he is
continuing his avocation after the accident, and when he is continuing his
avocation, the question of awarding compensation under the head "loss of
income/disability" by multiplier method, will not arise. But, at the same time,
we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled for compensation under
the head "loss of amenities", since he is finding it difficult to carry on his
day-to-day life without the help of others. Thus, we are of the view that a
sum of Rs.5 lakhs could be awarded under the head "loss of amenities".
Accordingly, a sum of Rs.5 lakhs is awarded under the said head.
9. Further, the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.50,000/-
towards future treatment. But, we are of the opinion that the
appellant/claimant had incurred huge expenses for medical treatment and
also he has to get treatment in future. Hence, a sum of Rs.1 lakh is awarded
under the head "future treatment" by setting aside Rs.50,000/- awarded
under that head.
10. Considering the long duration of treatment, for the pain and
suffering, the Tribunal had awarded only a sum of Rs.50,000/-, which is on
the lower side, and hence, a sum of Rs.1 lakh is awarded under the head "for
Page No.6/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
pain and suffering".
11. It is seen that for transportation charges, nutrition and attender
charges, the Tribunal had totally awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-, which is on
the lower side and the same is set aside and Rs.1,00,000/- is hereby totally
awarded under the heads "for transportation charges, nutrition and attender
charges".
12. The break-up details of the amounts awarded by the Tribunal,
in comparison with the amounts now awarded by this Court, are tabulated
hereunder:
Sl. Head under which the Amount Amount
No. amount is awarded awarded by the awarded by
Tribunal this Court
1 Disability 2,10,000 2,10,000
2 Medical bills 1,91,720 1,91,720
3 Future medical treatment 50,000 2,00,000
4 Pain and suffering 50,000 1,00,000
5 Transportation charges,
nutrition and attender 30,000 1,00,000
charges
6 Loss of amenities - 5,00,000
Total 5,31,720 13,01,720
13. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The total amount
awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.5,31,720/- is hereby enhanced to
Page No.7/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
Rs.13,01,720/- (Rupees thirteen lakhs one thousand seven hundred and
twenty only), which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of
claim petition till the date of deposit. The second respondent-Insurance
Company is directed to deposit the above said amount of Rs.13,01,720/-
together with interest as stated above, and costs, if any as awarded by the
Tribunal, after adjusting the amount(s) if any already deposited by them,
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. On such deposit by the second respondent-Insurance Company,
the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire compensation
amount along with accrued interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal,
after adjusting the amount(s) if any already withdrawn by him. As the award
of the Tribunal is enhanced as stated above, the appellant/claimant is
directed to pay necessary Court fee, if any, on the enhanced compensation.
There shall be no order as to costs in the present appeal.
(R.P.S.J) (S.S.K.J)
05.02.2021
Index: Yes
Speaking Order: Yes
cs
Page No.8/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri.
2. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.
Page No.9/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
Judgment dated 05.02.2021 in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
R.SUBBIAH, J
and
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J
cs
Judgment in
C.M.A.No.164 of 2021
05.02.2021
Page No.10/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
