Madras High Court

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Rajan on 21 January, 2021

                                                                 1

                                      In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

                                                    Dated: 21.01.2021

                                                           Coram

                                   The Honourable Mr. Justice D.KRISHNA KUMAR


                                               C.M.A.No.1714 of 2009
                                                        and
                                                  M.P.No.1 of 2009



                     National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
                     rep. by its Branch Manager,
                     37/2E, Salem Main Road,
                     Mettur.                                                   ... Appellant

                                                        ..Vs..


                     1.Rajan

                     2.M.Thangavel                                         ... Respondents




                     Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
                     Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree passed
                     by      the    learned   Additional    District   Judge    (FTC-V),   (MACT),
                     Coimbatore at Tiruppur in M.A.C.T.O.P. No.1213 of 2006 dated
                     13.08.2008.
                                    For Appellant                : Mrs.R.Sree Vidhya

                                    For Respondent-1             : Mr.S.S.Swaminathan




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                              2


                                                    JUDGMENT

Being aggrieved by the award passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal / learned Additional District Judge (FTC-V), (MACT),

Coimbatore at Tiruppur in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1213 of 2006 dated

13.08.2008, the Insurance Company has preferred this appeal.

2. This matter is heard through Video Conferencing today.

Heard Mr.R.Sree Vidhya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Insurance Company and Mr.S.S.Swaminathan, learned counsel for

the first respondent.

3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:-

a) On 27.02.2006 at about 1.30 hrs when the claimant was

proceeding in his TVS 50 Moped in Somanur Karumathampatty road

near R.G. Bakery, the lorry bearing registration No.TN-28-X-4456

which came in the opposite direction, driven by its driver/the second

respondent herein in a rash and negligent manner dashed against

the claimant causing grievous injuries. The claimant, who had

suffered 35% disability filed the claim petition, claiming a sum of

Rs.5 lakhs as compensation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

b) Before the Tribunal, the witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.3 are

examined and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked on the side of the

claimant. The Tribunal after analysing both the oral and

documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the accident

had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver

of the lorry which was insured with the appellant herein and

directed the Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.2,52,805/- with

7.5% interest p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment

to the claimant.

c) The break-up details of the award passed by the Tribunal is

as follows:-

                          Serial No.                       Heads                        Amount (Rs.)
                      1                Loss of earning power                      1,63,800
                      2                Medical expenses                            66,505
                      3                Transportation                               1,500
                      4                Loss of income during treatment period       3,000
                      5                Pain & sufferings                            15,000
                      6                Extra nourishment                             3,000
                                       Total                                      2,52,805




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

4. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant Insurance

Company has challenged the award passed by the Tribunal in the

present appeal.

5. Having considered the rival submissions of the learned

counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on

record.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company

submitted that the appeal has been filed mainly on the ground that

the multiplier method adopted by the Tribunal is not correct and the

same is unsustainable and contended that the Tribunal had erred in

adopting multiplier method for arriving at the loss of earning power

as the case pertains to injury and requires interference by this

Court. She also submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded

the said head by awarding percentage for the disability suffered by

the claimant at the accident. She further submitted that the

amounts awarded under the other heads are also excessive and

warrants interference.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent

claimant submitted that the Tribunal has rightly fixed the

compensation to the claimant. He further submitted that the

amounts awarded by the Tribunal on the other heads are very

meagre and seeks enhancement of compensation.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that

this Court can fix a reasonable amount under the other heads.

9. Taking into account, the submission made by the learned

counsel for the appellant in regard to adoption of multiplier method,

as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the

Tribunal ought not to have adopted multiplier method as the

present case on hand pertains to injury. Hence this Court accepts

and holds that the percentage of permanent disability has to be

taken into account for awarding compensation under the head Loss

of income due to permanent disability'. Considering the injuries

sustained by the claimant in the accident that took place on

27.02.2006, P.W.2/ Dr.Senthil Kumar in his evidence has deposed

that the claimant had suffered 38% disability which is evidenced

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

through disability certificate Ex.A6, hence, the same is accepted by

this Court. Therefore, by awarding Rs.2000/- per percentage for

the disability, a sum of Rs.76,000/- has been granted by this Court

towards loss of income due to permanent disability. In the absence

of any materials to prove the monthly income of the claimant as he

was a coolie, this Court fixes the notional monthly income at

Rs.3000/- per month and taking into account, the nature of injuries

sustained by him in the accident, he is entitled to receive a sum of

Rs.18,000/- (3000 x 6) for loss of income during the treatment

period of 6 months, as against the amount of Rs.3000/- awarded by

the Tribunal under the said head as the same seems to be meagre.

As per Ex.A5 series/medical bills, a sum of Rs.66,505/- granted by

the Tribunal towards medical expenses is accepted by this Court.

Since the claimant had suffered head injury, a sum of Rs.15,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and sufferings is enhanced to

Rs.25,000/-. Likewise, this Court is of the view that the injuries

suffered by the claimant are grievous in nature, a sum of

Rs.10,000/- is granted towards extra nourishment as against

Rs.3000/- awarded by the Tribunal. No amount has been awarded

towards loss of amenities and attendant benefits by the Tribunal

and hence, a sum of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.12,000/- respectively are

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

granted by this Court under the said heads. Only a meagre sum of

Rs.1500/- has been granted by the Tribunal towards transportation

charges, which is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- by this Court. In fine, a

sum of Rs.2,27,505/- has been arrived by this Court as

compensation to the claimant which is rounded off to Rs.2,30,000/-

as against the compensation of Rs.2,52,805/- awarded by the

Tribunal.

10. The break-up details of the modified compensation

amount granted by this Court is as follows:-

Serial No. Heads Amount awarded by Amount (Rs.) the Tribunal (Rs.) granted by this Court 1 Loss of income due to 1,63,800 (loss of 76,000 permanent disability earning power) 2 Loss of income during 3,000 18,000 treatment period 3 Medical expenses 66,505 66,505 4 Pain & sufferings 15,000 25,000 5 Transportation 1,500 10,000 6 Attendant benefits - 12,000 7 Extra nourishment 3,000 10,000 8 Loss of amenities - 10,000 Total 2,52,805 2,27,505/-

                                                                                                rounded off    to
                                                                                                2,30,000/-




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court modifies the award amount passed by the Tribunal to

Rs.2,30,000/- from Rs.2,52,805/- with interest at the rate of 7.5%

p.a. to the claimant from the date of petition till the date of

payment. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant

that the entire award amount has been deposited by the Insurance

Company and sought permission to withdraw the excess amount as

per the modified award amount of this Court. In view of the

modification of the award amount, the appellant/Insurance

Company as well as the claimant are entitled to withdraw their

appropriate amount if any, lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.1213 of

2006, Additional District Court (FTC-V), MACT, Coimbatore at

Tiruppur, on filing appropriate petition before the Tribunal.