Madras High Court
K.Selvaraj vs Sughu on 24 June, 2021
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE TMT.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
K.Selvaraj .. Appellant
Vs
1.Sughu
2.Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
RAI's Tower, Plot No.2054, 2nd Avenue 2nd Floor,
next to Senthil Nursing Home,
Anna Nagar,Chennai-600 040. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
16.11.2018 made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3119 of 2014 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes Court,
Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.F.Terry Chella Raja
For R2 : Mr.S.Arunkumar
For R1 : Notice dispensed with
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through “Video Conferencing/Hybrid” mode.
2.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 16.11.2018 made in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3119 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
3.The appellant is the claimant in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3119 of 2014 on
the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2,
Small Causes Court, Chennai. He filed the above said claim petition, claiming
a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in
the accident that took place on 28.05.2014.
4.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding by
the rider of the motorcycle belonging to the 1 st respondent and directed the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.2,19,200/- as
compensation to the appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
5.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellant has come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the
accident the appellant sustained right clavicle fracture with right side 4 to 7
ribs fracture with right lung contusion and multiple injuries all over the body.
P.W.3/Doctor examined the appellant and certified that the appellant suffered
45% disability and issued Ex.P10/disability certificate to that effect. The
Tribunal awarded a meagre sum of Rs.1,05,000/- towards disability at the rate
of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability. Due to the injuries sustained by the
appellant in the accident, he lost his earning capacity. The Tribunal ought to
have adopted multiplier method for awarding compensation towards
disability. At the time of accident, the appellant was aged 72 years was
working as a driver and was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. But the
Tribunal awarded a meagre sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of income to the
appellant. Due to the injuries sustained by the appellant, he could not
continue his work as he was doing earlier. The Tribunal ought to have
awarded more compensation towards loss of income. The amounts awarded
by the Tribunal under different heads are meagre and prayed for enhancement
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
of compensation.
7.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-
Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal accepted the disability
certificate issued by P.W.3/Doctor and awarded a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- for
35% disability at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability and the
same is not meagre. The appellant has not produced any material evidence to
prove his avocation and income. In the absence of any material evidence with
regard to avocation and income, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/-
towards loss of income, which is not meagre. The appellant has not suffered
any functional disability and hence, he is not entitled to any compensation
towards loss of earning capacity. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under
different heads are not meagre. The appellant has not made out any case for
enhancement of compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
8.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
9.From the materials available on record, it is seen that it is the case of
the appellant that in the accident he sustained right clavicle fracture with right
side 4 to 7 ribs fracture with right lung contusion and multiple injuries all
over the body. To prove the same, the appellant examined himself as P.W.1,
one A.Krishnamoorthy as P.W.2 and P.W.3/Doctor. P.W.3/Doctor examined
the appellant and certified that appellant suffered 45% disability and issued
Ex.P10/disability certificate to that effect. The Tribunal reduced the
percentage of disability from 45% to 35% on the ground that P.W.3/Doctor is
not the doctor who treated the appellant. P.W.3/Doctor has not produced the
working sheet for arriving at the quantum of disability and also considering
the evidence of P.W.3/Doctor that percentage of disability may vary from
Doctor to Doctor. The reason given by the Tribunal is not correct. The
respondents have not let in any contra evidence to disprove the evidence of
P.W.3/Doctor and Ex.P10/disability certificate. Hence, the appellant is
entitled to compensation for 40% disability. The Tribunal following the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in "2013 (2) TN MAC 583
(National Insurance Company Limited Vs. G.Ramesh" has awarded a sum
of Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability and the same is not proper. Thus,
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards disability is enhanced to
Rs.1,40,000/- (Rs.3,500/- X 40% of disability). The appellant has not proved
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
that he suffered functional disability and lost his earning capacity. Hence, he
is not entitled to any amount towards loss of earning capacity by adopting
multiplier method.
10.It is the contention of the appellant that the appellant has taken
treatment at Vijaya Health Centre, Chennai as inpatient for 3 days from
28.05.2014 to 30.05.2014. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards
pain & sufferings and Transport to hospital are meagre. Considering the
nature of injuries and period of treatment taken by the appellant, a reasonable
amount of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards pain & sufferings and Rs.5,000/- is
awarded towards Transport to hospital. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal
under other heads are just and reasonable and hence, the same are hereby
confirmed. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as
follows:
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Disability 1,05,000/- 1,40,000/- Enhanced
2. Pain and sufferings 35,000/- 50,000/- Enhanced
3. Loss of income 20,000/- 20,000/- Confirmed
4. Transport to hospital 3,000/- 5,000/- Enhanced
5. Extra nourishment 20,000/- 20,000/- Confirmed
6. Damages to clothing 4,000/- 4,000/- Confirmed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
7. Medical expenses 2,200/- 2,200/- Confirmed
8. Attender charges 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
9. Loss of amenities 20,000/- 20,000/- Confirmed
Total Rs.2,19,200/- Rs.2,71,200/- Enhanced by
Rs.52,000/-
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,19,200/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.2,71,200/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The 2nd respondent-
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount now determined
by this Court along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited,
if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment, to the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3119 of 2014 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes
Court, Chennai. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the
award amount now determined by this Court, along with interest and costs,
less the amount if any, already withdrawn by making necessary applications
before the Tribunal. No costs.
24.06.2021
mpa
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
To
1.The Special Subordinate Judge No.2,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
S.KANNAMMAL, J.
mpa
C.M.A.No.1812 of 2020
24.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
