Madras High Court
The Authorised Signatory vs Sathishkumar on 1 February, 2022
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
and
C.M.P.No.171 of 2022
The Authorised Signatory
Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited,
No.8, 100 Feet Road,
Nadesan Nagar, Puducherry. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Sathishkumar
2.Balachander
... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act 1988 against the award made in MCOP No.1376 of 2019 dated
27.08.2021 on the file of the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Pudhucherry.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
For Appellant : Mr.M.B.Raghavan for
M/s M.B.Gopalan Associates
For Respondents : Mr.S.Ganeshkumar for R1
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
This appeal arises out of the award passed by the Additional Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Pudhucherry in MCOP No.1376 of 2019 dated
27.08.2021.
2.The facts of the case in nutshell:-
This is the case of amputation. On 22.10.2019, at 09.00 p.m, the claimant
Sathishkumar was riding his Hero Extreme bike bearing Reg.No.PY-01-CF-7745
on Moolakulam Road, Ulavaikkal, Villianur, Puducherry. When he was nearing
Athithya School, an Omin Car bearing Reg.No.PY-01-CT-0039, which came from
the opposite direction, driven by the second respondent herein in a rash and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
negligent manner, dashed the claimant's vehicle. In the accident, the claimant fell
down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was taken to the
Government General Hospital, Pondicherry. Since the said injuries are grievous,
he had been taken to the MIOT Hospital, Chennai, wherein he was admitted as
inpatient and his right foot below knee was amputated. At the time of accident,
he was practicing as Advocate and earning Rs.50,000/- per month. The second
respondent herein is the owner and the appellant is the insurer of the offending
Omni Car. The Omni car is responsible for the accident. Hence, the claimant laid
a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.80,00,000/-.
3.The appellant Insurance Company filed their counter disputing the
manner of accident and nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and its
liability to pay the compensation. Further, in the counter, it has been contended
that the accident had occurred due to careless of both the claimant and the driver
of the Omni Car. It was also contended that the claim is excessive and exorbitant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
4.To substantiate the case, on the side of the claimant, he himself was
examined as P.W.1 and Exs.P1 to Ex.P.18 were marked. On the side of the
appellant/Insurance Company, the second respondent herein was examined as
R.W.1 and no document was marked. Besides, Disability Certificate was marked
as Ex.C.1.
5.The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, held
that the driver of the Omni car was responsible for the accident and awarded
compensation of Rs.48,53,000/- to the claimant. Assailing the award, the
appellant/Insurance Company has filed the present appeal.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company
would contend that the Tribunal has erred in granting substantial amount for
permanent disability and the amounts granted for pain and suffering, loss of
marital prospects and loss of expectation of life are on the higher side and it
requires reduction.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
7.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent/claimant submitted that the impugned award awarding the aforesaid
compensation is well reasoned and it requires no interference. He further
submitted that due to the accident, the claimant's right leg below knee has been
amputated, but the Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of loss of
amenities, attender charges and for extra nourishment. Hence, he prays for
dismissal of the civil miscellaneous appeal.
8.This Court carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel
for the appellant/Insurance Company and the learned counsel appearing for the
first respondent/claimant and perused the materials available on record.
9.In the case on hand, admittedly, at the time of accident, the claimant was
24 years and practicing as an Advocate. Since his right leg below knee has been
amputated, the Medical Board assessed his disability as 66% and the Tribunal has
also accepted the same. Though the claimant orally stated before the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
that he was earning Rs.50,000/- per month, since there was no proof to establish
his income, the Tribunal considering his age, has fixed the monthly notional
income as Rs.10,000/-, which is a reasonable one. Hence, the amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- (10000 + 40% = 14000 x 12 x 18 x 66/100=19,95,840 rounded off
to Rs.20,00,000/-) awarded under the head of disability is confirmed. Further,
considering the period of treatment undergone by the claimant, the amount
awarded towards medical bills is also confirmed. Since the amount granted under
the head of pain and sufferings, loss of marital prospects and loss of expectation
of life are on the higher side, they are reduced to Rs.1,70,000/- towards pain and
sufferings; Rs.1,70,000/- towards loss of marital prospects and Rs.1,00,000/-
towards loss of expectation of life. In the instant case, admittedly, the claimant
sustained 66% disability, but the Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the
head of loss of amenities, attender charges and extra nourishment and hence, this
Court awards Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities; Rs.50,000/- towards
attender charges and Rs.50,000/- towards extra nourishment. The amount of
Rs.43,000/- awarded under the head of transportation is enhance to Rs.50,000/-.
The rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal as 7.5% per annum is confirmed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the claimant is re-
quantified as follows:-
Heads Amount Re-quantified Status
awarded by the Amount by this
Tribunal Court
Disability 20,00,000/- 20,00,000/- confirmed
Medical bills 13,10,000/- 13,10,000/- confirmed
Pain and Sufferings 5,00,000/- 1,70,000/- reduced
Loss of Marital Prospects 5,00,000/- 1,70,000/- reduced
Transportation 43,000/- 50,000/- enhanced
Loss of expectation of life 5,00,000/- 1,00,000/- reduced
Loss of Amenities Nil 1,00,000/- granted
Attender Charges Nil 50,000/- granted
Extra nourishment Nil 50,000/- granted
Total 48,53,000/- 40,00,000/- 8,53,000/- is
reduced
10.In such view of the matter, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly
allowed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the modified
award amount with accrued interest and costs, less the amount already deposited,
if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order. On such deposit, the first respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
award amount less the amount already withdrawn, if any, together with
proportionate interest and costs. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S.,J.] [V.S.G.,J.]
01.02.2022
skn
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order :Yes/No
To
1.The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Pudhucherry.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madras High Court,
Chennai.
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
skn
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A.No.24 of 2022
and
C.M.P.No.171 of 2022
01.02.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
