Madras High Court

Louis Antony vs Bala Subramaniam on 23 February, 2021

                                                                              C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 23.02.2021

                                                         CORAM:

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                                  C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

                   Louis Antony                                                     .. Appellant

                                                          Vs.

                   1.Bala Subramaniam
                   (R1 was set exparte before the 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 09.01.2020

                   made in M.C.O.P.No.6317 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims

                   Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

                                         For Appellant     : Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan

                                         For R2            : Mr.S.Arunkumar


                   1/9


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                              C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

                                                   JUDGMENT

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed for enhancement of

compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 09.01.2020 made in

M.C.O.P.No.6317 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

2.The appellant is claimant in M.C.O.P.No.6317 of 2014 on the file of

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes

Court, Chennai. He filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of

Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the

accident that took place on 08.08.2014.

3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding by

the rider of the motorcycle belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the

2nd respondent/Insurance Company being insurer of the said motorcycle to

pay a sum of Rs.1,87,400/- as compensation to the appellant at the first

instance and recover the same from the 1st respondent, owner of the

motorcycle.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

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

accident, the appellant suffered fractures on right hand middle finger and

right foot and multiple injuries all over the body. He has taken treatment as

in-patient in Bone and Joint Hospital, Anna nagar, from 09.08.2014 to

12.08.2014 and underwent surgery. The Medical Board after examining the

appellant certified that the appellant suffered 10% disability. Due to the

injuries, the appellant could not do the work as he was doing earlier. The

Tribunal ought to have adopted multiplier method and awarded compensation

towards loss of earning capacity. At the time of accident, the appellant was

doing marketing work in Ayngaran Anak Video (P) Limited and was earning a

sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. The Tribunal without considering the same,

fixed only a meagre sum of Rs.9,500/- per month as notional income of the

appellant. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are

meagre and prayed for enhancement of compensation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

6.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd

respondent/Insurance Company contended that the appellant has not proved

that he suffered functional disability and lost his earning capacity. The

appellant did not examine any Doctor to prove that he suffered functional

disability. In the absence of any material with regard to loss of earning

capacity, the Tribunal rightly adopted percentage method and granted

compensation towards disability, which is not meagre. The amounts awarded

by the Tribunal under different heads are also not meagre. The appellant has

not made out any case for enhancement of compensation and 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/Insurance Company and perused the entire materials on record.

8.It is the case of the appellant that in the accident, he suffered

fractures on right hand middle finger and right foot and multiple injuries all

over the body. The Medical Board after examining the appellant certified that

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

he suffered 10% disability. The Tribunal fixed the disability of the appellant

at 10% and awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability. The

appellant has not produced any document to prove that he suffered functional

disability and lost his earning capacity. Hence, he is not entitled to any

compensation by adopting multiplier method. The accident is of the year

2014 and the amount awarded by the Tribunal per percentage of disability is

meagre. This Court by the judgment reported in 2020 (1) TN MAC 617 [M.

Chinnathambi Vs. S.Deepa and another], fixed a sum of Rs.4,000/- per

percentage of disability for the accident occurred in the year 2014 & 2015

and a sum of Rs.5,000/- per percentage of disability for the accident occurred

from the year 2016 onwards, due to rise in cost of living. In the present case,

the accident is of the year 2014. In view of the same, a sum of Rs.4,000/- is

awarded per percentage of disability. Thus, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal towards disability is modified to Rs.40,000/- (Rs.4,000/- X 10%).

8(i) The appellant contended that he has taken treatment as in-patient

in Bone and Joint Hospital, Anna nagar, from 09.08.2014 to 12.08.2014 and

underwent surgery. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

suffering, transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges are meagre.

Considering the nature of injuries and period of treatment taken by the

appellant, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering,

transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges are hereby enhanced

to Rs.25,000/-, Rs.10,000/-, Rs.15,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively.

8(ii) It is the contention of the appellant that he was doing marketing

work in Ayngaran Anak Video (P) Limited and was earning a sum of

Rs.15,000/- per month at the time of accident. The appellant failed to

substantiate the said contention. In the absence of any material evidence with

regard to avocation and income of the appellant, the Tribunal fixed a sum of

Rs.9,500/- per month as notional income of the appellant. The accident is of

the year 2014 and the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal is meagre.

Hence, a sum of Rs.13,000/- is fixed as monthly income of the appellant.

Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant would not have

attended the work atleast for a period of four months. Thus, the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of income is modified to Rs.52,000/-

(Rs.13,000/- X 4). The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under all other

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

heads are just and reasonable and hence, the same are hereby confirmed.

Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:

S.No Description Amount awarded Amount Award
by Tribunal awarded by confirmed or
(Rs) this Court enhanced or
(Rs) granted or
reduced
1. Disability 30,000 40,000 Enhanced
2. Pain and 15,000 25,000 Enhanced
suffering
3. Transportation 5,000 10,000 Enhanced
4. Extra 10,000 15,000 Enhanced
nourishment
5. Damage to 2,000 2,000 Confirmed
clothes and
articles
6. Loss of 15,000 15,000 Confirmed
amenities
7. Loss of income 28,500 52,000 Enhanced
8. Medical 56,886 56,886 Confirmed
expenses
9. Future medical 20,000 20,000 Confirmed
expenses
10. Attendant 5,000 10,000 Enhanced
charges
TOTAL 1,87,386 2,45,886
rounded off to rounded off to Enhanced by
1,87,400 2,45,900 Rs.58,500/-

9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.313 of 2021

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.1,87,400/- is hereby

enhanced to Rs.2,45,900/- 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 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. No costs.