Madras High Court
G.Nagalakshmi vs K.Manikkam on 8 January, 2021
1 CMA No.744 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
C.M.A.No.744 of 2017
G.Nagalakshmi ....Appellant
Vs
1.K.Manikkam
2.M/s.Sri Ram General Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.E-8, EPIP RIICO,
Industrial Estate, Sitapura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan 302 022.
(R1 remained exparte before the Tribunal
hence notice may be dispensed with for R1) ...Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 19.01.2015 made
in M.C.O.P.No.401 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Additional District Court, Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr.Lokesh
for Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel
For Respondents : R1-Exparte
Mr.K.Poomalai for R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2 CMA No.744 of 2017
JUDGMENT
(This case has been heard through Video Conferencing)
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the second
respondent.
2. The appeal is filed by the claimant being not satisfied with the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
3 On 31.05.2011, when the claimant/appellant was walking along
Namakkal to Salem main road, near Murugan kovil bus stop, Namakkal, a
Mahindra Pickup Van bearing Registration No. TN 54 A 1876 proceeding
towards Namakkal Town from Salem dashed against the claimant/appellant
and caused multiple grievous injury. The claimant/appellant was taken to
the Government Hospital, Namakkal and later shifted to MM Hospital,
Namakkal for treatment. In the accident, the claimant/appellant sustained
compound fractures on head, hip, leg and hand. She filed claim petition
seeking compensation for a sum of Rs.5,00,000 on the ground that she was
earning Rs.6000/- per month as a Laundry Worker and due to the accident,
she has substantially lost her earning capacity and also incurred medical
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
expenses to a tune of Rs.1,00,000/-.
4. The Insurance Company filed counter stating that it was the
negligence of the claimant, who suddenly crossed Namakkal to Salem Main
road, Murugan kovil bus stop and invited the alleged accident. Further, the
quantum of compensation and the liability to indemnify the vehicle owner
was also denied by the Insurance Company.
5. Before the Tribunal, to substantiate her claim, the claimant
examined herself and the doctor who gave the disability certificate. 11
exhibits were marked. The respondent Insurance Company filed Ex.R1, the
rough sketch of the accident.
6. The Tribunal after considering the evidence placed before it
awarded a sum of Rs.6,02,229/- rounded off to 6,02,200/-.
7. Considering the injury, it has applied multiplier method for the loss
of income. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit
that the notional fixation of Rs.5000/- as monthly income is very less and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
taking note of the fact that even for Homemakers Courts award Rs.6500/- as
notional income, therefore the award of the Tribunal accordingly should be
enhanced.
8. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the
claimant sustained fractured injury of tibia and there is a shortage of limb by
2 cm for which the doctor has certified 45% permanent disability. This will
not cause any loss of income to apply multiplier method. However, the
Tribunal has accepted the percentage of injury and applied multiplier to
compute the loss of income. While so, though the claim petition was
restricted to Rs.5,00,000/-, the Tribunal has awarded higher compensation
of Rs.6,06,200/- and therefore, there is no need to interfere the award.
Learned counsel for the respondent would also submit that the claimant has
not placed any evidence to show her earning capacity and therefore, fixation
of Rs.5,000/- inclusive of future prospects as notional income need no
interference.
9. This Court on considering the rival submission find that in the
absence of any documentary evidence to show the avocation of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
claimant, fixation of Rs.5,000/- as notional income based on the averments
in the claim petition cannot be construed as unfair fixation. Furthermore,
the Tribunal has applied multiplier method and accepted the percentage of
disability opined by the doctor. In view of the fact that the loss of income
of the claimant/appellant cannot be restricted only with respect to her
earning capacity as Laundry Worker but also as Homemaker and loss of
future prospects, this Court is of the opinion that her monthly income can be
notionally taken as Rs.6,000/- inclusive of future prospects and accordingly,
compensation shall be fixed. In the result, the compensation is refixed as
below:
Compensation under Various Award passed by this
Heads Court
Loss of income Rs. 5,18,400/-
(6000X12X16X45/100)
Medical Bills Rs. 1,00,229/-
Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/-
Pain and Suffering Rs. 25,000/-
Nourishment Rs. 5,000/-
Attender Charges Rs. 10,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/-
Total Rs. 6,88,629 /-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
10. Accordingly, the award of Rs.6,02,200/- is enhanced to
Rs.6,88,629/- with 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
deposit. The award amount shall be deposited by the Insurance Company
within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. On
such deposit, the claimant/appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount on
appropriate application.
11. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
No order as to costs.
08.01.2021
Speaking/Non Speaking
Index :Yes/No
vri
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court, Namakkal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
Vri
CMA No.744 of 2017
08.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
