A.G.Naveen Kumar vs M/S.Anush Associates Pvt. Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 11641 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 11641 Mad
Judgement Date : 15 June, 2021

Madras High Court

A.G.Naveen Kumar vs M/S.Anush Associates Pvt. Ltd on 15 June, 2021

                                                                            C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 15.06.2021

                                                       CORAM

                                     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

                                                C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

                                             (Through Video Conferencing)

                     A.G.Naveen Kumar                                           ... Appellant

                                                          Vs.

                     1.M/s.Anush Associates Pvt. Ltd.,
                       A2, Karam Towers,
                       No.45, Old No.23,
                       Venkatanarayana Road,
                       T.Nagar, Chennai - 17.

                     2.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
                       No.140, 2nd Floor, Chottabhai Centre,
                       Nungambakkam High Road,
                       Chennai - 34.                                            ... Respondents

                               Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                     Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Decree and Judgment dated 19.06.2019
                     made in M.C.O.P.No.4239 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident
                     Claims Tribunal (III Small Causes Court), Chennai.




                     ____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     Page No 1 of 8
                                                                             C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020


                                     For Appellant           : Mr.K.Varadha Kamaraj

                                     For First Respondent    : No appearance

                                     For Second Respondent : Mr.Sivakolappan

                                                        *******

                                                     JUDGMENT

The claimant is the appellant in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

He has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III Court of Small Causes, Chennai),

Chennai, in M.C.O.P.No.4239 of 2014.

2. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs.2,49,400/- as compensation together with interest at

7.5% per annum from the date of numbering of the claim petition till the

date of deposit, to the appellant for the injuries suffered by him.

3. The case of the appellant before the Tribunal is that on

10.03.2014 at about 08.30 a.m., when the appellant was riding

motorcycle bearing registration No. TN-12-B-5449 on Madras –

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 2 of 8 C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

Bangalore High Road, a car bearing registration No.TN-09-BD-1111

driven by its driver allegedly in a rash and negligent manner insured with

the second respondent Insurance Company came from the opposite

direction first hit an Auto rickshaw and then dashed against the appellant

and then a car, as a result of which, the appellant sustained grievous

injuries.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that while

awarding the aforesaid compensation, the Tribunal has considered only

15% disability against the 20% disability assessed by the PW2 Doctor.

It is further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded a

compensation towards disability at Rs.4,000/- per percentage for 20%

disability that was assessed by the PW2 Doctor.

5. It is further submitted that the appellant was admitted over a

period of 50 days in hospital as inpatient and therefore, the Tribunal

committed error in confining the compensation towards loss of income

only for a period of two months at Rs.12,000/- per month (Rs.12,000 x 2

= Rs.24,000). It is submitted that the nature of injury would put the

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 3 of 8 C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

appellant out of action at least for a period of six months. Therefore, the

appellant is entitled to additional compensation towards loss of income.

6. Defending the impugned Judgment and Decree passed by the

Tribunal, the learned counsel for the second respondent Insurance

Company submitted that the impugned Judgment and Decree is well

reasoned and requires no interference. He further submits that there is

contradiction in the number of days admitted in the hospital and as per

deposition of PW3, the appellant was hospitalised only for a period from

10.03.2014 to 14.03.2014. He further submits that the award amount may

be confirmed and the appeal may be dismissed.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the

learned counsel for the second respondent. I have perused the evidences

on record and the impugned Judgment and Decree passed by the

Tribunal.

8. There is no dispute regarding the nature of injuries suffered by

the appellant, i.e. Fracture of Tibia Left and Crush injury left foot 10*5

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 4 of 8 C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

cms., for which, he underwent IM nailing on the left Tibia and Skin

grafting for left foot and K-wire fixation.

9. In my view, the Tribunal ought to have awarded a just

compensation towards injuries instead of disability. This Court is

therefore considered 20% disability assessed by the PW2 Doctor for

enhancing the compensation towards injuries instead of disability. Thus,

a sum of Rs.45,000/- awarded towards disability by the Tribunal is

enhanced to Rs.60,000/- (20 x 3,000) under the head of injuries.

10. The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.24,000/- towards

loss of income. In my view, the appellant would have been out of action

minimum for a period of six months. Therefore, a sum of Rs.24,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.72,000/- (Rs.12,000 x 6). The

amount of compensation awarded under the other conventional heads is

not disturbed in this Judgment.

11. In the result, the loss of income of Rs.2,49,343/- rounded off to

Rs.2,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced as follows:-

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 5 of 8 C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

Heads Award amount Enhanced Status Amount Injuries Rs.45,000/- Rs.60,000/- Enhanced Pain and Sufferings Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/- Confirmed Extra Nourishment Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- Confirmed Transport to Hospital Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/- Confirmed Damages to clothes Rs. 500/- Rs. 500/- Confirmed Attender Charges Rs. 7,000/- Rs. 7,000/- Confirmed Medical Expenses Rs.57,843/- Rs.57,843/- Confirmed Future Medical Expenses Rs.25,000/- Rs.25,000/- Confirmed Loss of Income Rs.24,000/- Rs.72,000/- Enhanced Loss of Amenities Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/- Confirmed Rs.2,49,343/- Enhanced by Total rounded off to Rs.3,12,343/- another sum of Rs.62,943/-

Rs.2,49,400/-

12. In the result, the amount of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is enhanced by another sum of Rs.62,943/-. Thus, the second

respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit a sum of

Rs.3,12,343/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of

numbering of the claim petition till the date of deposit, less any amount

already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of

a copy of this Judgment.

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 6 of 8 C.M.A.No.1943 of 2020

13. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the

same together with interest, less any amount already withdrawn, by filing

suitable application before the Tribunal.