Madras High Court
R.Abdul Jabber @ Jabar Basha vs D.Jayaganthan on 29 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3148 of 2012
R.Abdul Jabber @ Jabar Basha ... Claimant/Appellant
..Vs..
1. D.Jayaganthan
2. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.134, Greams Road, HUB,
Siningi Buildings, IV Floor,
Chennai – 6. ... Respondents/Respondents
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
against the Judgement and decree dated 19.09.2008 made in
M.C.O.P.No.1523 of 2004 on the file of V Small Causes Court (Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal) Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.Ponnusamy for
M/s.Anand & Suryas
For Respondent No.1 : Notice unserved
For Respondent No.2 : Mr.D.Bhaskaran
*****
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
JUDGMENT
Dissatisfied with the judgment and decree, dated 19.9.2008,
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarding compensation of
Rs.1,16,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, the
claimant is before this Court for enhancement of compensation.
2. It is is the case of the claimant/appellant herein that on
24.10.2003 at about 2.05 p.m., the claimant/appellant herein met with an
accident when he was travelling as a passenger in the share auto bearing
registration No.TN-05-E 6598 on Thiruvalluvar Salai and L.B. Road junction,
Chennai proceeding from east to north, the driver of the above share auto
drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and at that time, an
unknown motorcycle came across the same junction and just to avoid a
mishap with the said motorcycle, the share auto drive applied sudden
brake, as a result, the share auto was overturned and the appellant
sustained grievous injuries. He took treatment at Govt. Royapettah
hospital, Chennai. The appellant claimed a total compensation of
Rs.2,50,000/- from the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
3 The Tribunal, based on the oral and documentary evidence
Exs.P1 to P.10, has awarded a sum of Rs.1,16,000/- as total compensation
payable by the second respondent/Insurance Company to the
claimant/appellant under the following heads:
Heads Amount in Rs.
Permanent disability 55% 55,000/-
Loss of Income for a period of 30,000/-
10 months (3000 x 10)
Pain and suffering 20,000/-
Extra Nourishment 3,000/-
Medical expenses 5,000/-
Transportation 2,000/-
Damage to clothes 1,000/-
Total 1,16,000/-
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimant/
appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/
Insurance Company and perused the materials available on record.
5. According to the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant, the tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,16,000/-
towards 55% permanent disability suffered by the appellant and on various
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
other heads. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
appellant sustained fracture of left tibia due to the accident. Disability
certificate Ex.P9 and X-ray Ex.P10 were produced before the tribunal.
P.W.2 Dr.Mathiazhagan deposed before the tribunal that he assessed that
the appellant sustained 55% permanent disability. According to the
appellant, he had taken treatment from 24.10.2003 to 23.10.2004 as
inpatient at Govt Royapettah hospital and he also produced discharge
summary Ex.P1. Again, he had taken treatment as inpatient at Govt.
Royapettah hospital from 23.4.2004 and 24.4.2004 for removal of implant
and thereafter, he had taken continuous treatment in the said hospital.
Therefore, the appellant suffered more than one year after the injuries
sustained by him in the said accident. According to the appellant, the
appellant was prevented from doing regular work for a period of one year.
The tribunal has awarded a meagre amount to the appellant under various
heads, viz., permanent disability, pain and suffering, Transportation, Extra
Nourishment, Damages to clothes. Therefore, the compensation awarded
by the tribunal requires substantial enhancement.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company would submit that based on the oral and documentary evidence,
the tribunal has rightly determined the compensation to the appellant.
P.W.2 assessed that the appellant sustained 55% permanent disability and
the tribunal awarded Rs.1000/- x 55 = 55,000/- to the appellant towards
permanent disability. Apart from that the tribunal also awarded reasonable
compensation under various heads. Therefore, there is no warrant to
interfere with the award.
7. Admittedly, the appellant sustained fracture in the left tibia
for which the Doctor who examined the appellant assessed the disability as
55% permanent disability. According to the counsel appearing for the
appellant, tribunal ought to have fixed Rs.2000/- per percentage instead of
Rs.1000/- towards permanent disability. Considering the year of the
accident took place and the decision of this Court as well as the decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that percentage fixed
by the tribunal requires enhancement of the said amount by fixing
Rs.1500/- per percentage. In respect of the loss of earning during the
period i.e. 24.10.2003 to 23.10.2004, the appellant had taken treatment in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
the hospital. According to the counsel for the appellant, appellant had
taken treatment for a period of 12 months, tribunal has granted
compensation for a period of 10 months only for loss of earning. This Court
is of the view that the appellant is entitled for 12 months period for the loss
of earning.
8. In sofar as the other heads are concerned, according to the
learned counsel for the appellant, tribunal has awarded meagre amount
which requires enhancement. To that extent, the compensation awarded
by the tribunal is modified on various heads and awarded as follows:
Heads Compensation Compensation Difference
awarded by the enhanced/ Amount in
Tribunal awarded by this Rs.
Rs. Court (Rs.)
Disability 55% x 1500/- 55,000/- 82,500/- 27,500/-
Loss of Income 3000 x 12 30,000/- 36,000/- 6,000/-
Pain & suffering 20,000/- 30,000/- 10,000/-
Transportation 2,000/- 5,000/- 3,000/-
Extra nourishment 3,000/- 10,000/- 7,000/-
Medical expenses 5,000/- 5,000/- --
Damages to clothes 1,000/- 1,000/- --
Loss of amenities -- 25,000/- 25,000/-
Attender charges -- 10,000/- 10,000/-
Total : 1,16,000/- 2,04,500/- 88,500/-
The compensation awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to the aforesaid
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
extent. Except the above modification, the award passed by the tribunal is
confirmed.
9. The second respondent/Insurance company is directed to
deposit the award amount of Rs.2,04,500/- (Rupees two lakh four thousand
and five hundred only) after deducting the amount if already deposited
before the tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the
date of petition till realization, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of the order. On such deposit being made by the
second respondent/Insurance company, the appellant is permitted to
withdraw the amount by filing appropriate application.
10. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly
allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
29.01.2021
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
vaan
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.3148 of 2012
vaan
To
1. The V Small Causes Court(Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal) Chennai.
2. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., No.134, Greams Road, HUB,
Siningi Buildings, IV Floor, Chennai – 6.
3. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madras High Court, Chennai-104.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3148 of 2012
29.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
