Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Minor Vishali Rep.By Guardian on 28 July, 2021
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Dated : 28.7.2021
Coram
The Honourable Mr.Justice ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross Objection No.76 of 2017 & CMP.No.11697 of 2016
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu
State Transport Corporation,
Villupuram ...Appellant in
CMA & Respt.
In Cross Obj.
Vs
Minor Vishali rep.by guardian
father Lakshmanan ...Respondent
in CMA & cross
objector in
Cross Obj.
APPEAL under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
against the fair and decretal order dated 17.3.2015 in MCOP.No.391 of
2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate
Court), Chidambaram.
CROSS OBJECTION under Order XLI Rule 22 of the Civil
Procedure Code against the fair and decretal order dated 17.3.2015 in
MCOP.No.391 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal (Subordinate Court), Chidambaram.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
For Transport Corporation: Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
For Claimant : Mr.A.Murugan
COMMON JUDGMENT
I have heard the learned counsel for the Transport Corporation
and the learned counsel appearing for the claimant.
2. CMA.No.1541 of 2016 has been filed by the Transport
Corporation challenging the award dated 17.3.2015 in MCOP.No.391 of
2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate
Court), Chidambaram (hereinafter called the Tribunal).
3. The very same award has been challenged by the claimant by
filing Cross Objection No.76 of 2017 and she has sought for
enhancement.
4. The Transport Corporation has challenged the impugned
award questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
5. The claimant has filed the cross objection seeking
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
enhancement of compensation.
6. The claimant was aged 7 years at the time of accident. Her
left leg has been amputated as a result of the accident caused on
05.3.2011 by a bus owned by the Transport Corporation. The nature of
injuries sustained by the claimant and her amputation have also not
been disputed by the Transport Corporation before the Tribunal. The
Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,25,000/- to the
claimant under the impugned award as detailed hereunder :
S. Heads Amount awarded
No by the Tribunal
.
1 Permanent disability Rs. 2,80,000/-
2 Pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/-
3 Artificial leg fixation Rs. 1,00,000/-
(medical expenses)
4 Transport Rs. 20,000/-
5 Nutrition Rs. 15,000/-
6 Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/-
7 Loss of amenities Rs. 1,00,000/-
(marriage prospects)
Total Rs. 6,25,000/-
7. The Tribunal has not adopted multiplier method for assessing
the compensation towards permanent disability as a result of the
injuries sustained by the claimant due to the accident. Having lost one
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
of her legs, this Court is of the considered that the Tribunal ought to
have adopted the multiplier method for assessing the compensation
towards permanent disability. The accident occurred in the year 2011.
The Tribunal fixed the notional monthly income of the claimant at
Rs.4,000/-, which, in the considered view of this Court, is low. If the
year of accident was taken into consideration, the notional monthly
income would have been fixed at a much higher sum.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Syed Sadiq &
Others Vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
[reported in 2014 ACJ 627], fixed the notional monthly income of a
vegetable vendor at Rs.6,500/- for an accident that took place in the
year 2008. The claimant being a minor aged 7 years at the time of
accident, if the same yardstick was taken into consideration, the
Tribunal ought to have fixed the notional monthly income at least at
Rs.6,500/. Since the notional monthly income fixed by the Tribunal at
Rs.4,000/- is too low, this Court enhances the notional monthly income
of the claimant to Rs.6,500/-.
9. The doctor assessed the disability of the claimant at 70%
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
based on the injuries sustained by her and it is confirmed by this
Court. Since multiplier method is being adopted by this Court and since
the notional monthly income of the claimant is enhanced to Rs.6,500/,
the compensation payable towards her permanent disability is
reassessed by this Court at Rs.8,19,000/- (Rs.6,500/- X 12 X 15 X
70/100).
10. With regard to compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
various other heads namely artificial leg fixation (medical expenses),
transport, nutrition, attendant charges and loss of amenities (marriage
prospects), the same will have to be necessarily enhanced by this
Court. Accordingly, this Court enhances the compensation towards
artificial leg fixation (medical expenses) from Rs.1,00,000/- to
Rs.1,50,000/-, towards transport from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/-,
towards nutrition from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.25,000/-, towards attendant
charges from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.25,000/- and towards loss of
amenities (marriage prospects) from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/-.
However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and
sufferings at Rs.1,00,000/- is confirmed by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
11. For the foregoing reasons, the total compensation awarded
by the Tribunal at Rs.6,25,000/- is enhanced to Rs.13,44,000/- as
detailed hereunder :
S. Heads Amount Amount
No awarded by enhanced by
the Tribunal this Court
1 Permanent disability Rs. 2,80,000/- Rs. 8,19,000/-
2 Pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 1,00,000/-
3 Artificial leg fixation Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 1,50,000/-
(medical expenses)
4 Transport Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 25,000/-
5 Nutrition Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 25,000/-
6 Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 25,000/-
7 Loss of amenities Rs. 1,00,000/- Rs. 2,00,000/-
(marriage prospects)
Total Rs. 6,25,000/- Rs.13,44,000/-
12. In view of the enhancement of the award, there is no merit
in the appeal filed by the Transport Corporation.
13. In the result, Cross Objection No.76 of 2017 filed by the
claimant is partly allowed. CMA.No.1541 of 2016 filed by the Transport
Corporation is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMP
is also dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
14. The Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire
award amount as determined by this Court in this appeal together with
interest and costs at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till date of realization less the amount already deposited to
the credit of the claim petition within two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that on deposit of
the entire award amount to the extent indicated in this judgment, the
claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount after she
attains majority and if any such application is made by the claimant
after she attains majority, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the entire
award amount together with interest lying to the credit of the claim
petition directly to the bank account of the claimant through RTGS.
The court fee on the enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by
the cross objector in Cross Obj.No.76 of 2017 - claimant before
receiving the copy of this judgment.
28.7.2021
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Court),
Chidambaram.
RS
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross.Obj.No.76 of 2017
ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J
RS
CMA.No.1541 of 2016 &
Cross Obj.No.76 of 2017 &
CMP.No.11697 of 2016
28.7.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
