Arumugam vs M.A.Haseeb
2022 Latest Caselaw 7141 Mad

                                                                           C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 06.04.2022

                                                      CORAM

                                    THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU

                                               C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

                     Arumugam                                                  .. Appellant


                                                           vs.

                     1.M.A.Haseeb
                     2. M/s.Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
                        Divisional Ofice,
                        Post Box No.8,
                        Jyothi Super Bazar,
                        Thodupuzha 685 584,
                         Kerala                                            .. Respondents



                     Prayer.: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
                     the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated
                     10.02.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.1470 of 2011 on the file of the Motor
                     Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court No.1) Salem.



                                      For Appellant    :   M/s.M.Sivakumar

                                      For R1           :   No Appearance

                                      For R2           :   Mr.J.Chandran

                     ____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     Page No 1 of 8
                                                                             C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

                                                     JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 10.02.2015 passed by

the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court No.1)

Salem in M.C.O.P.No.1470 of 2011, the injured Claimant has come up

with this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, seeking enhancement of

compensation.

2. On 22.07.2011 the appellant-claimant was travelling as a

pillion rider in a Hero Honda Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.TN-37-AA-

7909 from Perur to Ukkada Main Road, Coimbatore, near Sivaram Nagar

junction at Vaalangkulam by-pass road, at that time, a Bolero car bearing

RegNo.KL-41-C-1327 came from the rear end in a rash and negligent

manner and dashed against the claimant's vehicle. Due to the said

impact, the claimant was thrown away and he sustained grievous and

multiple injuries all over the body. Therefore, the claimant claimed a

sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation by way of filing the claim petition

before the Tribunal.

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 2 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

3. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the appellant, P.W.1 to P.W.3

were examined and exhibits Ex.P.1 to P.15 were marked. On the side of

the respondents, no witness was examined and exhibit Ex.R.1 was

marked.

4. After considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence

on record, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,64,000/- as

compensation to the claimant/appellant.

5. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation 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

the Tribunal failed to note that the injured had sustained serious and

multiple injuries all over the body and skull fractures which led to the loss

of eye vision. Because of the loss of left eye vision, he was leading a

vegetated form of life. The injured was working as a mason and now he

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 3 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

is unable to continue his avocation. P.W.2 Dr.S.Ravi deposed that the

injured is actually suffering from 100% loss of vision in one eye. The

injured has to go for eye transplantation. Hence, prayed for enhancement

of compensation.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second respondent

Insurance Company submits that there was no infirmity in the impugned

judgement and decree and therefore, the civil miscellaneous appeal is

liable to be dismissed.

8. Heard both sides.

9. On perusal of evidence, it is seen that the appellant had

sustained skull injury, fracture cranial fossa and left optical nerve injury.

Ex.P.8 – discharge summary issued by Dr.Sundararajan, Neuro hospital

clearly shows that the appellant had taken treatment as inpatient from

25.07.2011 to 29.07.2011. The Doctor/PW3 assessed the disability as

30% due to the fracture on the orbital region, as a result of which, the

appellant had suffered partial loss of vision. P.W.2 – General Surgeon had

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 4 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

opined that due to the fracture on the cranial fossa, the appellant had

suffered frequent head-ache, loss of memory and loss of concentration

and the said doctor has assessed the disability at 25%. The Tribunal,

finally fixed the disability at 35% as per Gazette notification issued by

Ministry of Social Justice, Government of India.

10. Considering the fact that this Court vide its earlier order dated

2.3.2022 had referred the case of the appellant to the Medical Board,

Government Hospital, Salem for exact assessment of disability. The

Dean, Government Hospital, Salem, had assessed the disability of the

appellant as 35% on account of loss of vision. On going through the

above submissions and subsequent diagnosis, this Court is inclined to

award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards future medical expenses. The

amount awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are just and

reasonable and hence the same are hereby confirmed. The total

compensation modified by this Court is as follows:

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 5 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

Heads Amount Amount Enhanced/ awarded awarded by this Confirmed/ by the Tribunal Court Granted ( Rs.) (Rs.) Pain and suffering 50,000/- 50,000/- Confirmed Partial loss of income 27,000/- 27,000/- Confirmed (Rs.4,500 x 6) Food and extra 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed nourishment Medical Expenses 22,000/- 22,000/- Confirmed Future Medical - 50,000/- Granted Expenses Transportation 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed For Disability 1,05,000/- 1,05,000/- Confirmed (Rs.3,000 x 35%) For loss of amenities 50,000/- 50,000/- Confirmed (Vision) Total 2,64,000/- 3,14,000/-

11. The compensation of Rs.2,64,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is

enhanced to Rs.3,14,000/- by adding further sum of Rs.50,000/-. The 2 nd

respondent Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced

amount of compensation together with interest at 7.5% per annum from

the date of petition till the date of such deposit, within a period of eight

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment, less the

amount already deposited if any. On such deposit, the appellant/claimant

is permitted to withdraw the same together with interest, less the amount

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 6 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

already withdrawn if any, by filing suitable application before the

Tribunal.

12. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed. No cost.

                                                                                         06.04.2022
                     Index    : Yes/No
                     Internet : Yes/No
                     Speaking : Non speaking order
                     kkd

                     To

                     The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

(Special Subordinate Court No.1) Salem

J.NISHA BANU, J.

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 7 of 8 C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

kkd

C.M.A.No.2657 of 2015

06.04.2022 (2/2)

____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No 8 of 8