Madras High Court
C.Lokdeep vs K.Vedanayagam on 5 August, 2022
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
C.M.A. No.1313 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.10895 of 2022
C.Lokdeep .. Appellant
Vs.
1.K.Vedanayagam
2.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore Division), Ltd.,
No.37, Mettupalayam Road,
Coimbatore 641 043. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 04.04.2018, made
in M.C.O.P. No.620 of 2014, on the file of the Special Sub Court, (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal), Coimbatore.
_____
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
For Appellant : Mr.M.Velmurugan
For RR2 : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.M.VELUMANI,J.]
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant-
claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation granted by the Tribunal
in the award dated 04.04.2018, made in M.C.O.P.No.620 of 2014, on the file
of the Special Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Coimbatore.
2.The appellant/claimant filed M.C.O.P. No.620 of 2014, on the file of
the Special Sub Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Coimbatore,
claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained
by him in the accident that took place on 22.01.2014.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
driving by the 1st respondent, driver of the Bus owned by the 2nd respondent-
Transport Corporation and directed the 2nd respondent to pay a sum of
Rs.17,55,424/- as compensation to the appellant.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellant has come out with the present appeal.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the
accident, the appellant sustained crush injury on right leg and right leg above
knee was amputated. He took treatment as in-patient at Ganga Medical Centre
and Hospital from 22.01.2014 to 28.01.2014. As per Ex.C1, the appellant has
suffered 83% permanent disability. The appellant has marked wound
certificate and discharge summary as Exs.P7 and P10 respectively and
examined himself as P.W.1. to prove the injuries sustained by him in the
accident. Due to the amputation of right leg above knee, the appellant who
was studying II year Mechanical Engineering, would not be able to work in
his field. The Tribunal considering the same, ought to have granted
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
compensation towards 100% loss of earning power. The Tribunal, without
considering the educational qualification of the appellant, fixed only a sum of
Rs.8,500/- per month as notional income, which is meagre. The Tribunal
failed to award any amount for the expenses incurred towards fixation of
artificial limb. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards extra
nourishment, transportation and pain and sufferings are meagre and prayed
for enhancement of the compensation.
6.Per contra, Mr.K.J.Sivakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the
2nd respondent-Transport Corporation submitted that at the time of accident,
the appellant was not an earning member. The notional income fixed by the
Tribunal is not meagre. The appellant did not prove that he could not
continue his studies and get any job. The appellant would have got some
employment. The appellant has not made out any case for enhancement of the
compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the
2nd respondent-Transport Corporation and perused the entire materials
available on record.
8.From the materials on record, it is seen that admittedly, at the time of
accident, the appellant was aged 20 years and studying II Year Mechanical
Engineering at Ramakrishna College, Vattamalai Palayam, Coimbatore. The
appellant was a non-earning member. Considering the fact that the appellant
was an Engineering student, but for the accident and amputation of his right
leg above knee, he would have got decent job and earned considerable
amount as salary. The Tribunal, considering this fact, has fixed the notional
income of the appellant at Rs.8,500/- per month. The accident is of the year
2014. The amount fixed by the Tribunal is meagre. Considering the date of
accident and the fact that the appellant was an Engineering student, a sum of
Rs.9,500/- per month is fixed as his notional income. The Tribunal failed to
grant any enhancement towards future prospects of the appellant. As per the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC)
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
[National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others], the appellant is
entitled to 40% enhancement towards future prospects. The Tribunal
considering Ex.C1-disability certificate, rightly adopted multiplier method.
The appellant has not proved that he is totally disabled and could not
continue his studies and could not get any job. In view of the same, he is not
entitled to compensation for 100% disability, but he is entitled to
compensation only for 83% of disability. Hence, fixing the monthly income
at Rs.9,500/-, granting 40% enhancement towards future prospects and
applying multiplier '18', the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of
earning for 83% disability is modified to Rs.23,84,424/- {[Rs.9,500/- +
Rs.3,800/- (40% of Rs.9,500/-)] x 12 x 18 x 83%}.
9.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant further submitted
that for the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant incurred a sum of
Rs.3,19,250/- towards medical expenses for fixation of artificial limb and
produced Ex.P11 – medical bills to that effect. From the award, it is seen that
the Tribunal did not consider Ex.P11 as a whole. A perusal of Ex.P11 shows
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
that the appellant has spent sum of Rs.5,250/-, Rs.95,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/-
towards advance payment for fitment of RT/AK prosthesis and Rs.19,000/-
after two years from the accident towards full and final payment towards
socket change. The appellant is entitled to Rs.3,19,250/- towards medical
expenses incurred for fixation of artificial limb. Hence, a sum of
Rs.3,19,250/- is awarded towards fixation of artificial limb. The Tribunal
failed to award any amount towards loss of marital prospects. Due to the
injuries and disability suffered in the accident, the marriage prospects of the
appellant would have been reduced. Hence, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is
awarded towards loss of marital prospects. The amount 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. No Description Amount awarded Amount Award
by Tribunal awarded by this confirmed or
(Rs) Court (Rs) enhanced or
granted
1. Loss of earning 15,23,880/- 23,84,424/- Enhanced
2. Medical bills 1,06,544/- 1,06,544/- Confirmed
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
3. Pain and sufferings 1,00,000/- 1,00,000/- Confirmed
4. Transportation to 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
Hospital
5. Extra nourishment 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
6. Damage to clothing and 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
articles
7. Loss of marital - 2,00,000/- Granted
prospects
8. Fixation of artificial - 3,19,250/- Granted
limb
Total 17,55,424/- 31,35,218/- Enhanced by
13,79,794/-
10.In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the amount awarded
by the Tribunal at Rs.17,55,424/- is enhanced to Rs.31,35,218/- together with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
deposit. The 2nd respondent-Transport Corporation 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 twelve weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit of M.C.O.P.
No.620 of 2014. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the
award amount, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn, by filing
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
necessary applications before the Tribunal. It is made clear that the appellant
is not entitled for any interest for the delay period on the amount of
Rs.13,79,794/-, enhanced by this Court, as per the order of this Court dated
09.06.2022, made in C.M.P.No.3974 of 2022 in C.M.A.SR.83282 of 2021.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
(V.M.V., J) (S.S., J)
05.08.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes/No
gsa
To
1.The Special Subordinate Judge
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Coimbatore.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1313 of 2022
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
and
S.SOUNTHAR,J.
(gsa)
C.M.A. No.1313 of 2022
05.08.2022
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
