Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs G. Devarajan on 24 September, 2021
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.2690 of 2021
and
C.M.P. No.15452 of 2021
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
3/137, Salamedu, Vazhudhareddy,
Villupuram.
...Appellant
vs.
1. G. Devarajan
2. The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
Thirunelveli Ltd., Thirunelveli.
...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 29.10.2020
made in MCOP No.4091 of 2014 on the file of Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore.
For Appellant : Mr. K.J. Sivakumar
JUDGMENT
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant Transport Corporation
challenging the award dated 29.10.2020 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore) in
MCOP No.4091 of 2014.
2. The Appellant Transport Corporation has challenged the
impugned award only on the ground that the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is excessive.
3. The Tribunal under the impugned award directed the Appellant
Transport Corporation to pay the 1st respondent a compensation of
Rs.32,36,702/- together with interest and cost as detailed hereunder.
Heads Amount Awarded by the
Tribunal (in Rs.)
Loss of income with loss of 26,14,500/- (15000+ 25% x
future prospects 12 x 14 x 83%)
Medical expenses 2,62,202/-
Pain & Suffering 25,000/-
Transportation Charges 25,000/-
Treatment for fixing 3,00,000/-
Artificial Limb
Extra Nourishment 10,000/-
Total 32,36,702/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
4. The 1st respondent/ claimant sustained grievous injuries in his
head and multiple fractures all over his body and his right hand was also
amputated, as a result of an accident on 06.07.2014 caused by a bus
owned by the Appellant Transport Corporation.
5. The medical Board has issued a disability certificate under Ex.
C1 for the 1st respondent/ claimant on 09.03.2018 by stating that the 1st
respondent/ claimant has become physically disabled and has suffered
83% permanent disability. The nature of injuries sustained by the 1st
respondent/ claimant has also not been disputed by the Appellant
Transport Corporation before the Tribunal, as seen from the evidence
available on record.
6. The 1st respondent/ claimant was hospitalized for the period
between (a) 07.07.2014 and 07.07.2014, (b) 07.07.2014 and
17.07.2014 and (c) 25.09.2014 and 28.09.2014. The discharge
summaries issued by the respective hospitals have also been marked as
Ex. P5, Ex. P6 & Ex.P7. The treatment records of the first
respondent/claimant has also been marked as Ex.P8. The Photographs of
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
the 1st respondent/ claimant has also been marked as Ex. P10 which
confirms that the right hand of the 1st respondent/ claimant has been
completely crushed. Only after giving due consideration to the evidence
available on record, the Tribunal has assessed the disability of the 1st
respondent/ claimant at 83%. This Court is also in agreement with the
said assessment.
7. The 1st respondent/ claimant was aged 45 years as seen from
Ex. P1 and Ex. P4. The Appellant Transport Corporation has also not
disputed the age of the 1st respondent/ claimant before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal while assessing the compensation towards loss of earning
capacity of the 1st respondent/ claimant has adopted a correct multiplier
of 14, since the 1st respondent/ claimant was aged 45 years at the time of
the accident. The Tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income of the
1st respondent/ claimant at Rs.15,000/- based on the salary certificate
produced by the 1st respondent/ claimant before the Tribunal which has
been marked as Ex. P13. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view
that the assessment made by the Tribunal as regards the monthly income
of the 1st respondent/ claimant is also a correct assessment.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
8. The Tribunal has also awarded 25% towards loss of future
prospects to the 1st respondent/ claimant, after giving due consideration
to his age and his avocation. The said assessment is a correct assessment
as it is in accordance with law.
9. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various
heads cannot also be considered to be excessive, considering the fact that
the 1st respondent/ claimant has sustained grievous injuries which
resulted in the amputation of his right hand. The total compensation of
Rs.32,36,702/- awarded by the Tribunal to the 1st respondent/ claimant
as stated supra, cannot be considered to be excessive as alleged by the
Appellant.
10. In the result, there is no merit in this Appeal. Accordingly, this
Appeal is dismissed. The Appellant Insurance company is directed to
deposit the amount awarded by the Tribunal, after deducting the amount
already deposited if any together with interest from the date of claim till
the date of deposit and costs to the credit of MCOP.No.4091 of 2014
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
Judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal shall transfer the
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
amount lying to the credit of MCOP.No.4091 of 2014 to the bank
account of the first respondent/claimant through RTGS within a period of
one week thereafter. No costs. Consuquently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
24.09.2021
ab/nl
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
I Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Cuddalore.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
2. The Record Section,
High Court of Madras
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
ab
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA.No.2690 of 2021
C.M.A.No.2690 of 2021
and
C.M.P. No.15452 of 2021
24.09.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
