Madras High Court
Vinoth Kumar vs G.Rajavel on 4 August, 2022
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
Vinoth Kumar ... Appellant/ Petitioner
Vs
1.G.Rajavel
2.The Divisional Manager,
The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
Vellore
... Respondents/ Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
to set aside the award and decree dated 26.11.2012 made in MCOP No.143
of 2011 by the Hon'ble Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge,
Cheyyar, by enhancing the award amount as prayed for in this appeal.
For Petitioner : Mr.Adarsh Subramanian
For Respondent : Mr.S.Dakshnamoorthy [R.2]
JUDGEMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
The petitioner before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Subordinate Judge, Cheyyar is the appellant before this Court seeking
enhancement of the claim petition.
2. It is his case that on 01.03.2011 at about 02.30 hours when he was
standing at the edge of the road near the Murugan Temple at the Cheyar to
Vandavasi Road. The bus bearing Registration No. TN 25 V 4479
proceeding from Cheyar to Vandavasi which was driven in a rash and
negligent manner hit the petitioner as a result of which he sustained grievous
injuries. The bus belonged to the 1st respondent and was insured with the
2nd respondent/insurance company. He had, therefore, claimed
compensation of a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him
which had permanently disabled him.
3. The 1st respondent/ owner of the bus remained ex parte and it was
the 2nd respondent/ insurance company which had filed a counter. The
reading of which does not indicate a serious challenge to the claim except for
questioning the age, occupation, the nature of injuries and the income of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
petitioner and contending that the compensation claimed was an exaggerated
figure.
4. The Tribunal below on considering the evidence on record had
come to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only on account of the
rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and thereby held the respondent
liable to compensate the petitioner. The Tribunal thereafter arrived at a
compensation of Rs.1,61,626/-. The Tribunal had adopted the percentage
method for arriving at the compensation for the disability. The disability had
been assessed at 55%, the Tribunal had reduced the same to 50%.
Aggrieved by the same the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Mr. Adarsh Subramanian, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant would contend that the injuries had left him totally disfigured
and disabled. The disability certificate issued would clearly show that the
petitioner has sustained a very grievous injury and a perusal of the
photograph of the injury would clearly highlight that the petitioner cannot
carry on his activities as before and the injury is definitely an impediment to
his earning capacity. That apart, he was just aged about 22 years at the time
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
of the accident and the disfigurement has definitely hampered his marriage
prospects. He would also contend that the Tribunal has not taken into
consideration all of the above facts.
6. Mr.S.Dakshnamoorthy, the learned counsel appearing for the
Insurance Company would submit that no proof has been filed to show that
the injuries resulted in a loss of earning capacity.
7. Heard both the counsels.
8. A perusal of the disability certificate coupled with the photographs
of the plaintiff and the injuries would clearly show that the appellant had
suffered deformity due to the accident. The appellant also will not be in a
position to do his normal work. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have
assessed the compensation for the disability by adopting a multiplier
method. The petitioner was aged 22 years at the time of the accident and he
was doing his 1st year B.Sc Zoology, therefore, a sum of Rs.7,500/- is
adopted as the notional income. It is P.W.1 doctor who has assessed the
disability at 55% which the Tribunal has reduced to 50 % stating that there
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
is always a difference of 5% in the assessment of disability between one
doctor and another. Therefore, this Court shall adopt the very same
percentage of disabilities as taken by the Tribunal i.e; 50%. Considering the
age of the injured, ‘18’ is the appropriate multiplier therefore, the
compensation under the head of disability would be Rs.7,500 x 12 x18 x
50/100 = Rs.8,10,000/-
9. Therefore, the reworked compensation would be as follows:-
S.No Description Amount Amount Award confirmed
awarded by awarded by or enhanced or
Tribunal this Court granted or
(Rs) (Rs) reduced
1. For disability and injury 1,05,000/- 8,10,000 Enhanced
2. For pain and suffering 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
3. For Transportation cost 3,000/- 3,000/- Confirmed
4. For nutrition 2,000/- 2,000/- Confirmed
5. For loss of income 18,000/- 18,000/- Confirmed
6. Medical Bills 23,626/- 23,626/- Confirmed
TOTAL 1,61,626/- 8,66,626/- enhanced by
Rs.7,05,000/-
10. Therefore, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
award of the Tribunal be and hereby is enhanced to a sum of Rs.8,66,626/-
from Rs.1,61,626 /- together with interest @ 7.5 % per annum from the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
date of petition till the date of deposit. In all other aspects the award of the
Tribunal is confirmed. The 2nd respondent/insurance company is directed to
deposit the said amount (Rs.8,66,626 /-) to the credit of M.C.O.P.No. 143 of
2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge,
Cheyyar, together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim
petition till the date of deposit and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less,
the amount, if any already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the
appellant/petitioner is permitted to withdraw the award amount along with
interest and costs, after adjusting the amount if any already withdrawn. The
Tribunal shall not disburse the amounts until proof of payment of the Court
fee is produced by the claimant/appellant failing which the Tribunal shall get
a confirmation from this Court that the Court fee has been paid. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
04.08.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
shr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Subordinate Judge, Cheyyar.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
P.T. ASHA, J,
shr
CMA.No.3645 of 2019
04.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
