Madras High Court
Minor A.R.Ramya vs Sree Ramamoorthy on 10 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
Minor A.R.Ramya
Rep.by N.F.and mother A.R.Pramila
Achamangalam Village & Post
Krishnagiri District. ... Appellant
..Vs..
1.Sree Ramamoorthy
2.The Branch Manager
New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
No.15/1, Arunalpet Branch,
No.6-15-31, Kubera Towers
Arundelpet Main Road,
Guntur, A.P. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, to prefer the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal aggrieved by the
award and decree dated 05.04.2011 made in MCOP.No.439 of 2006 on
the file of the Motor Vehicle Claims Principal District Judge,
Krishnagiri.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
For Appellant : Mr.Mukund R.Pandiyan
For Respondents : Ms.Salomi
for Mr.C.Ramesh Babu for R2
R1- Notice unserved
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the
award and decree dated 05.04.2011 made in MCOP.No.439 of 2006 on
the file of the Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal/Principal District Judge,
Krishnagiri.
2. It is the case of the minor appellant/claimant that on
25.09.2004 at about 08.15 pm, the appellant/claimant along with her
mother, grandmother and grandfather were travelling in the Maruthi Zen
Car bearing Registration No.TN-22-R-0369, which was driven by her
father, on Vaniyambadi-Krishnagiri NH Road towards Krishnagiri from
Madras. When they were proceeding near Kandiyur Junction Road at
Natrampalli bypass, a Lorry, bearing Registration No.AP-07-T-3529
belonging to the first respondent insured with the second respondent,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
came in a rash and negligent manner in wrong track and hit the Car. Due
to the accident, the appellant/claimant and others sustained grievous
injuries and his father died on the spot. At the time of the accident, the
appellant/claimant was 8 years old and studying 3rd Standard. After the
accident, she is not able to sit, stand or walk freely. Hence, she made a
claim for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation.
3. In order to prove the claim, on the side of of the appellant
/claimant, PW1 to PW3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked.
On the side of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence have
been adduced.
4. The Tribunal after analysing the entire evidence came to
the conclusion that the accident was happened due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry and the respondents are liable
to pay a sum of Rs.2,14,145/- as compensation. The break-up details of
the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
Heads Amount awarded by the
Tribunal
Permanent disability (35%) (2000 x 35) 70,000/-
Medical Expenses 1,11,145/-
Pain and sufferings 20,000/-
Attender charges 4,000/-
Extra Nourishment 6,000/-
Transport charges 3,000/-
Total Rs. 2,14,145/-
5. According to the learned counsel for the appellant/
claimant, the appellant sustained grievous injuries and she was admitted
in the Tirupattur Government Hospital and subsequently she was shifted
to CMC Hospital, Vellore. Again she was admitted in a Hospital at
Chennai on 17.10.2004 and she underwent surgery on 18.10.2004,
thereafter, she was discharged from the Hospital on 22.10.2004. Once
again she underwent an operation on 17.04.2006 and discharged from the
Hospital on 20.04.2006. PW3, an Orthopaedic Doctor, examined the
appellant/claimant and assessed her Permanent Disability at 50% and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
also issued permanent disability certificate, which was marked as
Ex.A38. However, the Tribunal without considering the nature of the
injuries suffered by the appellant/claimant and the disability certificate,
on its own fixed disability at 35%. Thereafter, the Tribunal by awarding
a sum of Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability, arrived at a sum of
Rs.70,000/- [2,000 x 35] under the head “Permanent Disability”, which
is not sustainable. Further, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under
other heads are also very meagre. Hence, the appellant has filed the
present appeal.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/
Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal by fixing permanent
disability at 35% has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/- for Permanent
Disability. As far as the other heads are concerned, the Tribunal has
rightly fixed the compensation. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be
dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
7. This Court considered the rival submissions of both the
parties and perused the materials on record.
8. It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the
appellant that the Tribunal has fixed only 35% disability and awarded a
meagre amount under the head "Permanent Disability". On a perusal of
the records, it is seen that PW3, the Doctor after examining the appellant
/claimant, assessed the disability at 50% and the appellant also marked
the documents viz., Ex.A38, the disability certificate and Ex.A37, X-ray
to prove his disability. However, the Tribunal has reduced the percentage
of disability to 35% without assigning any proper reason. Hence, this
Court is of the view that the assessment of PW3, Doctor is fairly
reasonable and this Court accepts the evidence of the Doctor as well the
Ex.A-38 disability certificate produced before the Tribunal and fixes the
disability at 50%. Thus, the "Permanent Disability" of the appellant/
claimant is arrived at Rs.1,00,000/- by awarding a sum of Rs.2,000/- per
percentage of disability [2,000 x 50].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
9. Since the appellant/claimant has taken medical treatment
for a long time from 25.09.2004, the sum of Rs.1,11,145/- awarded by
the Tribunal under the head of “Medical Expenses” is enhanced to
Rs.1,45,000/-.
10. Considering the long duration of treatment underwent by
the appellant/petitioner, this Court finds that the sum of Rs.20,000/-,
Rs.4,000/- and Rs.3,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the heads “Pain
and Sufferings”, “Attender Charges” and “Transportation Charges”,
respectively, appears to be on the lower side and as such, the same are
hereby enhanced to Rs.40,000/-, Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/-,
respectively.
11. Since no amount was warded under the head “Loss of
Amenities”, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under such head.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
12. The sum of Rs.6,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under
the head “Extra Nourishment” appears to be just and fair, and hence, the
same is confirmed.
13. Thus, this Court has enhanced the compensation amount
as follows:
Heads Amount awarded by Enhanced
the Tribunal compensation
Permanent disability (Permanent disability 35%) (Permanent disability 50%)
(2000 x 35%) (2000 x 50)
70,000/- 100,000/-
Medical Expenses 1,11,145/- 1,45,000/-
Pain and sufferings 20,000/- 40,000/-
Attender charges 4,000/- 10,000/-
Extra Nourishment 6,000/- 6,000/-
Loss of Amenities - 10,000/-
Transport charges 3,000/- 5,000/-
Total Rs. 2,14,145/- Rs.3,16,000/-
14. Thus, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed by
enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,14,145/- to Rs.3,16,000/-
(Rupees three lakhs and sixteen thousand only) with interest @ 7.5% per
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
annum from the date of claim petition till the date of payment. The
second respondent/ Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award
amount as determined above, less the amount if any already deposited,
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. On such deposit being made, the appellant/ claimant is
permitted to withdraw the award amount, less the amount(s) if any
already withdrawn by filing necessary application before the Tribunal.
The appellant/ claimant is directed to pay necessary court fee, if any, on
the enhanced compensation amount. No costs.
10.02.2021
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
dna
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.,
dna
To
1.The Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri.
2.The Branch Manager
New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
No.15/1, Arunalpet Branch,
No.6-15-31, Kubera Towers
Arundelpet Main Road,
Guntur, A.P.
C.M.A.No.3320 of 2011
10.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
