Madras High Court
C.Vigneswaran vs S.Ganesan on 1 July, 2021
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
C.Vigneswaran ... Appellant
Vs
1.S.Ganesan
2.The Branch Manager,
United Insurance Company Limited,
Motor Third Party Claims Office,
th
Silingi Buildings, 4 Floor,
134, Greams Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.06.2015 in
MCOP.No.2985 of 2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III
Small Causes Court), Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Nalliyappan
For Respondent 2 : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy
JUDGMENT
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
This Appeal has been filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of
compensation under the impugned award dated 30.06.2015 passed by the
rd
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Court of Small Causes), Chennai in
MCOP.No.2985 of 2013.
2. Heard Mr.R.Nalliyappan, learned counsel for the Appellant and
Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy, learned counsel for the second respondent. Since no
adverse orders are going to be passed against the first respondent, notice to
the first respondent is dispensed with by this Court.
3. The Appellant/claimant unsatisfied with the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal has preferred this Appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation. The details of the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal to the Appellant/claimant are as follows:
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Transport to Hospital 1,000/-
Extra nourishment 1,000/-
Medical Expenses 5,710/-
Pain and suffering 10,000/-
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
Loss of earning 5,000/-
Disability 30,000/-
(2000 x 15%)
Total 52,710/-
4. In the claim petition, the Appellant/claimant has pleaded that he has
sustained the following injuries as a result of an accident caused by a vehicle
owned by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent viz.,
(a) fracture over right wrist, (b) Fracture over left shoulder and elbow, (c)
Abrasions over left leg and (d) multiple injuries all over the body.
5. Before the Tribunal, the Appellant/claimant has filed eight
documents which were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 and two witnesses were
examined namely, the Appellant/claimant himself as PW1 and the Doctor
who examined him as PW2. On the side of the respondents, neither any
document was filed nor any witness examined, before the Tribunal.
6. However, before the Tribunal, excepting for filing of O.P.Chit
issued by the Government Hospital on 13.05.2013 which has been marked
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
as Ex.P3, no other document has been filed to prove that the
Appellant/claimant had sustained injuries mentioned in the claim petition.
O.P. chit does not disclose the injuries that the Appellant/claimant is said to
have sustained as a result of the accident. The Tribunal after taking into
consideration the documents filed by the Appellant/claimant and after taking
note of the fact that he has not taken treatment as an in-patient for the
injuries sustained by him has fixed the disability of the Appellant/claimant at
15%, eventhough the Doctor who has alleged to have examined the
Appellant/claimant has assessed the disability of the Appellant/claimant at
40%. The Tribunal has also observed under the impugned award that no
evidence has been produced by the Appellant/claimant with regard to his
follow up treatment. The Doctor PW2 has also admitted, during his cross-
examination that the Appellant/claimant has not underwent any surgery.
Therefore this Court is of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly
not accepted the disability certificate Ex.P7 issued by the Doctor (PW2) for
the purpose of assessment of Appellant's/ claimant's disability. The Tribunal
has assessed the disability of the Appellant/claimant at 15% which in the
considered view of this court is marginally low and it has to be enhanced to
20% in view of the claim made by the Appellant/claimant that he has been
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
taking treatment at Puthur for which medical records are not available.
Accordingly, the disability of the Appellant/claimant is fixed by this Court at
20% instead of 15% fixed by the Tribunal.
7. The accident happened in the year 2013. For an accident of the year
2013, it is settled practice of Courts to fix the disability compensation
calculated at Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability. However, the Tribunal
under the impugned Award calculated the disability compensation at
Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. Accordingly, this Court enhances the
disability compensation fixed by the Tribunal from Rs.30,000/- calculated at
Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability for the 15% disability to Rs.60,000/-
calculated at Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability for 20% disability
assessed by this Court.
8. The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,000/- towards
transportation to hospital and another sum of Rs.1,000/- towards extra
nourishment which in the considered view of this court is too low and
accordingly, this court enhances the same to Rs.2,000/- under each of the
said heads.
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
9. With regard to the compensation of Rs.5,710/- towards medical
expenses is concerned, the same is accepted by this Court as it is supported
by the bills submitted by the Appellant/claimant.
10. With regard to the compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards pain and
suffering and another sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of earnings are
concerned, the same is a just compensation and does not call for any
interference and it is confirmed.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.52,710/- to Rs.84,710/- as detailed hereunder:
Heads Amount awarded by Amount awarded by
the Tribunal this Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Transport to Hospital 1,000/- 2,000/-
Extra nourishment 1,000/- 2,000/-
Medical Expenses 5,710/- 5,710/-
Pain and suffering 10,000/- 10,000/-
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
Loss of earning 5,000/- 5,000/-
Disability 30,000/- 60,000/-
(2000 x 15%) (3,000 x 20%)
Total 52,710/- 84,710/-
Conclusion:
12. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The second respondent
Insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation awarded by this
Court i.e, Rs.84,710/-, after deducting the amount already deposited if any,
together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim
till the date of deposit and costs, to the credit of MCOP.No.2985 of 2013
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
Judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the
amount lying to the credit of MCOP.No.2985 of 2013 to the bank account of
the Appellant/claimant through RTGS within a period of one week
thereafter. No costs.
01.07.2021
nl
Index: Yes/ No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
To
1. The III Court of Small Causes, Chennai
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
nl
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
C.M.A.No.195 of 2016
01.07.2021.
