Madras High Court
Sham Anand vs Issac Thambiraj on 18 January, 2021
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 18.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
Sham Anand ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Issac Thambiraj
2.Branch Manager,
Ipco Tokiyo General Insurance Company Ltd.,
28, 1st & 2nd Floor,
West Usman Road,
T.Nagar,
Chennai - 17. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173
of Motor Vehicles Act, against the Judgment and Decree dated
24.04.2009 in M.C.O.P. No.263 of 2007, on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Tirunelveli.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Selvakumaran
For 1st Respondent : Ex-parte
For 2nd Respondent : Mr.V.Sakthivel
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
JUDGMENT
Being dissatisfied with the quantum awarded by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli, in
M.C.O.P. No.263 of 2007, dated 24.04.2009, the claimant as appellant,
has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
2.The case of the claimant is that on 30.07.2007 at about
7.30 a.m., he is riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN 69 X
5154 on Tirunelveli-Tiruchendur main road. At that time, a lorry bearing
Registration No.TN 74 W 2153 which was owned by the first respondent
and insured with the second respondent insurance company and the driver
of the lorry drove it in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the
motor cycle. In that impact, he sustained injuries. Even though, the case
of the claimant was disputed by the second respondent/Insurance
Company, the finding of the Tribunal that the accident took place only
due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry was not
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
challenged and thus, it has become final. Hence, on this aspect, no further
discussion is required in this appeal.
3.Perusal of record shows that the claimant examined himself
as P.W.1 and examined Dr.Ramaguru as P.W.2. The wound certificate
was marked as Ex.P.3 and the disability certificate was marked as
Ex.P.16.
4.According to P.W.2 and Ex.P.16, the claimant has suffered
35% permanent disability, however, the Tribunal has taken the disability
as 30% and awarded Rs.30,000/- by applying Rs.1,000/- per percentage.
Likewise, Exs.P.8 to Exs.P.12 would reveal that the claimant was
hospitalized in Sri Sakthi Hospital and Sri Devi Hospital and he had spent
Rs.89,838.18/-paise towards medical expenses. Since the claimant
restricted the medical expenses for Rs.50,000/-, the Tribunal awarded
only Rs.50,000/-, though the medical bills shows that he spent
Rs.89,838.18/- paise for his treatment, as stated above.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
5. Mr.T.Selvakumaran, learned counsel for the appellant,
contended that this Court awarded Rs.2,000/- per percentage and the
claimant is entitled for entire medical expenses, even though it is
restricted to Rs.50,000/-.
6.Per contra, Mr.V.Sakthivel, learned counsel for the second
respondent contended that since the accident has taken place in the year
2007, the Tribunal has rightly applied Rs.1,000/- per percentage and the
appellant has not made out any case to interfere with the findings of the
Tribunal.
7.In the matter on hand, as rightly pointed out by the learned
counsel for the appellant, this Court is awarding compensation in the case
of permanent disability by applying Rs.2,000/- per percentage. Hence,
the award under permanent disability is enhanced from Rs.30,000/- to
Rs.60,000/-. With regard to medical expenses also, I am of the opinion
that the claimant is entitled for the medical expenses as per Exs.P.8 to
Ex.P.12 which comes to Rs.89,838.18/- paise, which is rounded off to
Rs.90,000/-. In all other aspects, the award of the Tribunal is confirmed.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
8. The award of the tribunal is modified as under:-
S.No. Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. For permanent 30,000 60,000 enhanced
disability(30%)
(30%x2,000)
2. For Medical 50,000 90,000 enhanced
expenses
3. For extra 3,000 3,000 confirmed
nourishment
4. For pain and 20,000 20,000 confirmed
sufferings
5. For 3,000 3,000 confirmed
Transportation
Total Rs.1,06,000 Rs.1,76,000/- By enhancing a
sum of
Rs.70,000/-
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly
allowed, enhancing the award of the Tribunal from Rs.1,06,000/- to a sum
of Rs.1,76,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of
claim petition till the date of realization with proportionate costs. The 2nd
respondent shall deposit the modified award amount with interest at the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
rate of 6%p.a., and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount already deposited, if
any. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire
amount, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal. No costs.
18.01.2021
Internet:Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
rm
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order
that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
cum – Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
K.KALYANASUNDARAM.J.,
rm
C.M.A(MD)No.1308 of 2009
18.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
