Madras High Court
S.Subburaman vs Balaji on 17 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
S.Subburaman .. Appellant
Vs.
1.Balaji
(R1 remained exparte before Tribunal)
2.United India Insurance Company Limited,
Third Party Hub,
Silingi Building,
No.134, Greams Road,
Murugesanaicker Street,
Chennai – 600 006. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
24.03.2017 made in M.C.O.P.No.3699 of 2012 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, VI Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan
For R2 : Mr.D.Bhaskaran
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 24.03.2017 made in
M.C.O.P.No.3699 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
VI Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.3699 of 2012 on the file
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, VI Small Causes Court, Chennai. He
filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as
compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place
on 16.03.2012.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the auto belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.45,600/- as compensation
to the appellant at the first instance and recover the same from the 1st
respondent.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellant has come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
accident the appellant sustained Laceration with degloving injury over right
foot, injury in chest and severe injury in right leg and multiple injuries all over
the body and has taken treatment as outpatient in the New Hope Indian
Speciality Hospitals, Arumbakkam, Chennai. He examined
Dr.K.J.Mathiazhagan as P.W.2 and proved the nature of injuries and
disability. P.W.2/Doctor examined the appellant and certified that appellant
suffered 15% disability and issued Ex.P7/disability certificate to that effect.
The 2nd respondent has not let in any contra evidence to the evidence of
P.W.2/Doctor and Ex.P7disability certificate. The Tribunal in the absence of
any contra evidence, erroneously rejected Ex.P7/disability certificate. The
Tribunal ought to have granted compensation as claimed by the appellant
under different heads and prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6.Per contra, Mr.D.Bhaskaran, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company contended that appellant suffered only simple
injuries. He was treated only as outpatient and there is no bone injury as
claimed by him. The Tribunal considering the nature of injuries, did not
accept the evidence of P.W.2/Doctor and Ex.P7/disability certificate issued by
him. The Tribunal granted excess amount towards pain and sufferings. In
view of the same, the appellant is not entitled for any enhancement and
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7.Heard through Video Conferencing the learned counsel appearing for
the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent
and perused the entire materials on record.
8.It is the case of the appellant that in the accident he sustained
Laceration with degloving injury over right foot, injury in chest and severe
injury in right leg and multiple injuries all over the body and has taken
treatment as outpatient in the New Hope Indian Speciality Hospitals,
Arumbakkam, Chennai. He examined Dr.K.J.Mathiazhagan as P.W.2 and
proved the nature of injuries and disability suffered by him. P.W.2/Doctor
examined the appellant and certified that appellant suffered 15% disability
and issued Ex.P7/disability certificate to that effect. During treatment, the
appellant has spent a sum of Rs.25,000/- for hospital expenses. On the other
hand, it is the case of the 2nd respondent that appellant suffered only simple
injuries and compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not meagre. From the
evidence of P.W.2/Doctor and Ex.P7/disability certificate, it is mentioned that
“pain and stiffness in right foot and ankle movements restricted. Difficulty in
walking/climbing steps and standing work and scar over right foot”. The 2nd
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
respondent has not disproved the evidence of P.W.2/Doctor and
Ex.P7/disability certificate by letting in any evidence. The reason given by the
Tribunal for not accepting the evidence of P.W.2/Doctor, Ex.P7/disability
certificate and not granting any compensation for disability is not proper. In
view of the same, the appellant is entitled to compensation for disability as per
Ex.P7/disability certificate. The accident is of the year 2012 and the appellant
is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability. Thus, the
appellant is entitled to Rs.45,000/- (Rs.3,000/- X 15% of disability) towards
disability. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are just
and reasonable and hence, same are hereby confirmed. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Disability - 45,000/- Granted
2. Pain and sufferings 25,000/- 25,000/- Confirmed
3. Medical expenses 8,599/- 8,599/- Confirmed
4. Extra nourishment 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
5. Damages to clothes 1,000/- 1,000/- Confirmed
6. Damages for mental 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
and physical shock
7. Transportation 1,000/- 1,000/- Confirmed
Total Rs.45,599/- Rs.90,599/- Enhanced by
rounded off to rounded off to Rs.45,000/-
Rs.45,600/- Rs.90,600/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.45,600/- is hereby enhanced
to Rs.90,600/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of deposit. The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company
is directed to deposit the award amount now determined by this Court along
with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, 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.3699 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, VI Small Causes Court, Chennai, at the first instance and recover
the same from the 1st respondent. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted
to withdraw the award amount now determined by this Court, along with
interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn by making
necessary applications before the Tribunal. It is made clear that the appellant
is not entitled to any interest for the default period as per the order of this
Court dated 25.09.2019 made in C.M.P.No.17278 of 2019 in
C.M.A.No.SR.95567 of 2019. No costs.
17.02.2021
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
To
1.The VI Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Small Causes Court,
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.3748 of 2019
17.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
