Madras High Court
M/S.Royal Sundaram Alliance ... vs B.Chandran on 24 June, 2021
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
M/s.Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited,
Sundaram Towers,
No.46, Whites Road,
Royapuram, Chennai – 600 014. ... Appellant
..Vs..
1.B.Chandran
2.T.Mangaiyarkarasi ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and decree in MCOP.No.209 of
2012 dated 01.04.2015 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
VI Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellants : Mr.E.Rajadurai
for Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan
For Respondent 1 : Mr.T.G.Balachandran
R2 – Door Locked
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Appellant
Insurance Company challenging the impugned award dated 01.04.2015
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (VI Court of Small Causes,
Chennai) in MCOP.No.209 of 2012.
2. Heard Mr.E.Rajadurai, learned counsel representing
Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the Appellant/Insurance
Company and Mr.T.G.Balachandran, learned counsel for the first
respondent/claimant. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against
the second respondent, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with by
this Court.
3. The Appellant Insurance Company has challenged the impugned
award only on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is excessive. The details of the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal to the first respondent/claimant are as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Medical expenses 1,27,600/-
Loss of Income 27,000/-
Transportation 5,000/-
Nourishment 5,000/-
Attender Charges 5,000/-
Cloths and Motor cycle 5,000/-
Loss of earning capacity 3,93,120/-
Pain and Suffering 15,000/-
Amenities 15,000/-
Total 5,97,720/-
Rounded off to 5,97,800/-
4. Before the Tribunal, the first respondent /claimant has filed nine
documents which were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 and two witnesses were
examined namely, the first respondent /claimant himself as PW1 and the
Doctor who examined him as PW2. On the side of the Appellant Insurance
Company, neither any document was filed nor any witness examined before
the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
5. The Tribunal has adopted multiplier method for assessing the
compensation towards the loss of earning capacity to the first
respondent/claimant. However, as seen from the evidence available on
record, no evidence has been placed by the first respondent/claimant that
due to the injuries sustained by him as a result of an accident, he was unable
to do his regular work. The first respondent/claimant sustained the
following injuries as a result of the accident viz., fracture of right leg, head
injury and he was hospitalised for a period of 11 days from 23.11.2011 to
03.12.2012. He has underwent only one surgery. The Doctor has assessed
the disability of the claimant at 45%. The first respondent/claimant was a
Centring Contract Maistry and was aged 42 years at the time of the accident.
As observed earlier, there is no evidence placed on record by the first
respondent/claimant that due to the injuries sustained by him, he has
suffered permanent disability. This being the case, this Court is of the
considered view that the Tribunal ought not to have adopted multiplier
method while assessing the loss of earning capacity to the first
respondent/claimant but instead ought to have awarded disability
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
compensation alone. Accordingly, the compensation of Rs.3,93,120/-
towards loss of earning capacity awarded by the Tribunal is hereby set
aside.
6. The Doctor PW2 who assessed the disability of the first
respondent/claimant has assessed the disability at 45% as seen from the
disability certificate Ex.P9. The same is accepted by this Court and
however, this Court is of the considered view that the disability
compensation will have to be fixed at Rs.1,35,000/- calculated at Rs.3,000/-
per percentage of disability for 45% disability suffered by the first
respondent/claimant. This Court fixes the compensation at Rs.3,000/- per
percentage of disability after giving due consideration to the year of the
accident which happened in the year 2011. Accordingly, this Court awards a
compensation of Rs.1,35,000/- towards disability compensation for 45%
disability calculated at Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability.
7. The Tribunal under the impugned award has granted a
compensation of Rs.27,000/- towards loss of income to the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
respondent/claimant calculated at Rs.9,000/- per month for a period of three
months which in the considered view of this Court is too low and it has to
be enhanced. It is evident that the first respondent/claimant would have
been unable to do his regular work as a result of the injuries sustained by
him, atleast for a minimum period of eight months. Considering the said
fact, the compensation towards loss of income to the first
respondent/claimant is enhanced to Rs.72,000/- calculated at Rs.9,000/- per
month for a period of eight months instead of Rs.27,000/- fixed by the
Tribunal.
8. With regard to the compensation payable towards transportation,
nourishment and attender charges are concerned, the same will have to be
necessarily enhanced by this Court, since the quantum of compensation
fixed by the Tribunal under those heads are low. Accordingly, this Court
enhances the compensation payable towards transportation, nourishment
and attender charges to Rs.10,000/- each instead of Rs.5,000/- each fixed by
the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
9. With regard to the compensation payable towards pain and
suffering is concerned, the Tribunal has fixed the same at Rs.15,000/-
which is too low and it has to be enhanced and accordingly, this Court
enhances the same to Rs.35,000/-.
10. Similarly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss
of amenities at Rs.15,000/- is also low and it has to be enhanced to
Rs.25,000/-. With regard to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
towards clothing and motor cycle repairs are concerned, the same is
confirmed by this Court as it is a just compensation.
11. With regard to the compensation towards medical expenses
awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the same is confirmed by this court
as the same is supported by Ex.P3, Ex.P4 & Ex.P5.
12. For the foregoing reasons, this Court reduces the compensation
payable to the first respondent/claimant from Rs.5,97,800/- to Rs.4,29,600/-
as detailed hereunder:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
Heads Amount awarded Amount awarded by
by the Tribunal this Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Medical expenses 1,27,600/- 1,27,600/-
Loss of Income 27,000/- 72,000/-
Transportation 5,000/- 10,000/-
Nourishment 5,000/- 10,000/-
Attender Charges 5,000/- 10,000/-
Cloths and Motor 5,000/- 5,000/-
cycle
Loss of earning 3,93,120/- --
capacity
Disability -- 1,35,000/-
Pain and Suffering 15,000/- 35,000/-
Amenities 15,000/- 25,000/-
Total 5,97,720/- 4,29,600/-
Rounded off to 5,97,800/- 4,29,600/-
Conclusion:
13. In the result, this appeal shall stand partly allowed and the
compensation payable to the first respondent/claimant is reduced to
Rs.4,29,600/- from Rs.5,97,800/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5%
per annum from the date of claim till the date of deposit and costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
14. It is represented by the learned counsel for the Appellant
Insurance Company that the Insurance Company has already deposited the
entire compensation amount of Rs.5,97,800/- awarded by the Tribunal to the
credit of MCOP.No.209 of 2012.
15. Since this Court has reduced the compensation, the Appellant
Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw the excess amount deposited
by them before the Tribunal by filing an appropriate application and the
Tribunal is directed to transfer the amount lying to the credit of
MCOP.No.209 of 2012 to the bank account of the first respondent
respondent/claimant through RTGS within a period of one week from the
date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs.
24.06.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
nl
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
nl
To
1. The VI Court of Small Causes, Chennai
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
C.M.A.No.2852 of 2016
24.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
