Arumugam vs Ananth
2021 Latest Caselaw 11864 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 11864 Mad
Judgement Date : 17 June, 2021

Madras High Court

Arumugam vs Ananth on 17 June, 2021

                                                       C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                           DATED : 17.06.2021

                                CORAM

            THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

                         C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020

                       (Through Video Conferencing)


Arumugam                                                   ... Appellant

                                   Vs.

1.Ananth

2.The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
                  nd

 Oriental House, 2 Floor,
 No.115, Broadway Road,
 Chennai – 600 108.                                        ... Respondents

      Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 17.12.2018
made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.2722 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (II Court of Small Causes, Chennai).

            For Appellant             : Mr.A.G.F.Terry Chella Raja

            For First Respondent      : No appearance

            For Second Respondent : Mr.N.Sampath
                         JUDGMENT

The claimant is the appellant in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

____________ Page No 1 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020 He has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for enhancement of

compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Court

of Small Causes, Chennai), Chennai, in the impugned Judgment and

Decree dated 17.12.2018 in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.2722 of 2010.

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

awarded a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- as compensation together with interest at

7.5% per annum from the date claim petition till the date of deposit, to

the appellant for the injuries suffered by him, under the following heads:-

                 Sl.               Heads                Award
                 No.                                   Amount
                  1         Pain and Sufferings         Rs.1,00,000/-
                  2         Extra Nourishment           Rs. 10,000/-
                  3         Transportation              Rs.   5,000/-
                         Total                          Rs.1,15,000/-

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

15.08.2005 at about 04.30 p.m., when the appellant was riding a TVS 50

bearing registration No.TN-31-B-8120 on G.S.T.Road, Gudailam

Junction, a Tembo Van bearing registration No.TN-37-J-2233 belonging

to the first respondent insured with second respondent driven by its driver

in a rash and negligent manner hit the appellant, as a result of which, the ____________ Page No 2 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020 appellant sustained the following injuries:-

i.Head Injury ii.Fracture of Right lower rib iii.Fracture of Right F.A.Radius iv.Loss of upper teeth A/3 v.Dislocation of right knee vi.

4. This appeal has been filed for enhancement of the aforesaid

compensation for another sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. It is submitted that the

Tribunal committed error in not awarding any amounts towards injuries /

disability of the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant further

submits that the appellant may be given one more opportunity and the

case be remanded back to the Tribunal to establish the nature of injuries

suffered by the appellant.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the second respondent

Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has awarded exaggerated

amount of compensation in absence of direct evidence to substantiate the

above injuries. It is submitted that the accident is of the year 2005 and the

claim was filed only in the year 2010 and therefore, there is no point in

referring the case back to the Tribunal for re-examination of the issue.

6. The learned counsel for the second respondent further submits ____________ Page No 3 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020 that the appellant may be referred to the Medical Board at Chennai to

ascertain the disability before awarding any additional compensation.

7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel

for the appellant and the learned counsel for the second respondent

Insurance Company. I have perused the evidences on record and the

impugned Judgment and Decree.

8. Before the Tribunal, the appellant has deposed evidences as PW1

and has marked three exhibits, namely FIR, AR Copy and Discharge

Summary. The Discharge Summary is from the Government Hospital,

Ulundurpettai. Therefore, as far as the injuries are concerned, there is no

dispute that the appellant had suffered the above mentioned injuries as

stated in Ex.P3 Discharge Summary of the Government Hospital.

9. The appellant met with an accident involving the insured vehicle

which stands established by Ex.P1 and Ex.P2. The injuries suffered by

the appellant are not grievous injuries and have not resulted in any

permanent disabilities. However, the Tribunal ought to have awarded

some amounts towards injuries. At this distance point of time, it would

____________ Page No 4 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020 not be fair in remitting the case back to the Tribunal to facilitate the

appellant to produce the additional evidence to substantiate the injuries.

That apart, as far as referring the appellant to the Medical Board is

concerned, most of the injuries suffered by the appellant would have been

healed due to the efflux of time and it would not be fair to ascertain the

nature of injuries by subjecting the appellant to fresh medical

examination.

10. Therefore, I am inclined to award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards

injuries and a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of income for a period of

six months (6 x 5,000) as the injuries would have been put the appellant

out of action and he would not earned any amounts as a plumber during

the aforesaid period of six months.

11. At the same time, the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards

pain and sufferings awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and same is

reduced to Rs.50,000/-. A sum of Rs.5,000/- awarded towards

transportation is enhanced to Rs.8,000/- and a sum of Rs.10,000/-

awarded towards Extra Nourishment is also enhanced to Rs.12,000/-.

Accordingly, total compensation of Rs.1,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal

____________ Page No 5 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020 is enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- as follows:-

                 Sl.                  Heads        Enhanced Amount
                 No.
                  1         Pain and Sufferings           Rs. 50,000/-
                  2         Injury                        Rs. 50,000/-
                  3         Loss of Income for            Rs. 30,000/-
                            the period of six
                            months
                  4         Extra Nourishment             Rs. 12,000/-
                  5         Transportation                Rs.   8,000/-
                         Total                            Rs.1,50,000/-

12. The second respondent Insurance Company is therefore

directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- together with interest at 7.5%

per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit, less any

amount already deposited, within a period of eight weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

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

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

suitable applications before the Tribunal.

____________ Page No 6 of 8 C.M.A.No.1887 of 2020

14. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.

17.06.2021

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No jen