Madras High Court
Pavadi vs C.Selvakumar on 29 March, 2022
CMA No.2158 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.03.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
C.M.A.No.2158 of 2018
Pavadi ... Appellant
Vs.
1.C.Selvakumar
2.The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co.Ltd.,
J.N.Street, Puducherry. ... Respondents
Prayer: This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 173
of M.V.Act, 1988, to set aside the order and decree of the
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.739 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, (Motor
Accident Claim Tribunal) at Puducherry dated 31.01.2018.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Raghavachari
For Respondent : Mr.D.Bhaskaran
No.2
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
JUDGMENT
The claimant in MACTOP No.739 of 2015 is the appellant herein.
When the said MACTOP No.739 of 2015 came up for consideration before
the Principal Sub Judge, Puducherry/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Puducherry, the learned sub judge, by judgment dated 31.01.2018,
considering to injuries suffered, had awarded a total compensation of
Rs.4,18,000/- to the claimant. Questioning that particular quantum of
compensation granted, the claimant has preferred this appeal before this
Court.
2.Heard Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr.D.Bhaskaran, learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent/Insurance Company.
3.The claimant Pavadi S/o. Angamuthu, said to be aged 64 years at
the time of accident, was working in a Private Company, Puducherry as
Watchman. On 10.04.2015 at about 11.30 p.m. in the night, he was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
returning home from his company. When he was about to cross the
Pondy to Villupuram main road to reach his home, a Hero Honda Pleasure
motorcycle bearing registration No.PY-01 BY-4026 came in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed against him and he was thrown away in the
road and suffered injuries, which were as follows:
“ Injuries to the face, Below Right Leg knee and
abdomen and all over the body.”
4.Seeking compensation for injuries suffered, the claimant preferred
MACTOP No.739 of 2015 before the Principal Sub Court, Puducherry/
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puducherry. During the course of trial
and during the pendency of the petition, on 10.02.2016, his right leg was
amputated below the knee and this facts is stressed by the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant to urge that the compensation granted should be
interfered with and not only that an additional head of future medical
expenses should also be considered. That had not been granted by the
Tribunal.
5.Before the Tribunal, during trial, the claimant/appellant had
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
examined himself as PW1 and eight documents were marked as Exs.P1
to P8. The relevant documents were FIR in crime No.95 of 2015 dated
10.04.2015 marked as Ex.P1 and the copy of the insurance certificate
marked as Ex.P2, the copy of the discharge summaries marked as Ex.P4 &
P5, the copy of the wound certificate marked as Ex.P7 and the copy of the
medical bills marked as Ex.P8 series.
6.On the side of the Insurance Company, one witness was examined
as RW1 and three documents were marked as Ex.R1 to R3. The copy of the
Accident Register of the petitioner dated 10.04.2015 issued by Sri
Venkateshwaraa Medical College Hospital and Research Centre was
marked as Ex.R3. The certificate of Medical Board dated 15.12.2016 with
regard to disability was also marked as Ex.X1.
7.The Tribunal proceeded to determine the issue of negligence and
found that at the time when the claimant was crossing the road, the
offending vehicle/Hero Honda Pleasure motorcycle bearing registration
No.PY01-BY-4026 had come apparently in a rash and negligent manner and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
at high speed, dashed against the claimant and caused injuries. It was
therefore observed and held that it was only owing to the rash and negligent
manner in which the motorcycle was driven, the accident had occurred.
Therefore, negligence was placed on the driver of the motorcycle. I would
affirm that finding. The National Insurance Co.Ltd., insurer of the
motorcycle/ the second respondent before the Tribunal was directed to pay
the compensation.
8.The Tribunal then proceeded to determine the compensation. At
that time, the age of the claimant was 64 years. The Tribunal, in the absence
of any direct evidence, determined the notional income at Rs.6,000/-.
Thereafter, based on the monthly income at Rs.6,000/-, the annual income
was determined at Rs.6,000/- X 12 = 72,000/-. The Tribunal then adopted
multiplier 13. This is not correct. This adoption of multiplier 13 has to be
necessarily interfered with. The correct multiplier is 7 for a person aged 64
years. The tribunal had then restricted the loss of earning to a sum of
Rs.2,50,000/- which is not correct. The Tribunal had granted a sum of
Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony, pain and suffering and a sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
Rs.43,000/- towards medical expenses. There can be no quarrel about the
same. The Tribunal also granted a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards nutritious
food, a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and a sum of
Rs.5,000/- towards attender charges. The Tribunal also granted a sum of Rs.
25,000/- towards loss of basic amenities and another sum of Rs.25,000/- for
purchase of false leg shoe for mobility. Finally, a total compensation of
Rs.4,18,000/- was granted.
9.Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
assailed this particular grant of compensation and urged that the fact that
right leg was amputated, was evident before the Tribunal and the Tribunal
should have considered granting future medical expenses. Learned counsel
also stated that the determination of notional income at Rs.6,000/- was not
proper. The petitioner though 65 years was employed as a Watchman.
Therefore, the income should have been determined as per the actual
income he was earning.
10.Heard Mr.D.Bhaskaran, learned counsel appearing for the Second
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
respondent.
11.Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances, I would
determine the notional income at Rs.6,500/- in the absence of direct
evidence, on that particular aspect. The annual income, therefore, will be
fixed at Rs.6500/- x12 = 78,000/-. Adopting the multiplier at 7 and taking
80% towards disability the loss of earning would be Rs.4,36,800/-
(Rs.78,000/- X 7 X 80% = Rs.4,36,800/-). The total compensation granted
under the various heads are as follows:
Loss of earning .. Rs.4,36,800/-
Pain and suffering .. Rs. 50,000/-,
Medical expenses .. Rs. 43,000/-,
Nutritious food .. Rs. 10,000/-,
Transportation expenses .. Rs. 10,000/-,
Attender charges .. Rs. 25,000/-,
Loss of basic amenities .. Rs. 25,000/-,
Purchase of false leg shoe
for mobility .. Rs. 25,000/-,
For future medical expenses .. Rs. 43,000/-
---------------------------
Total .. Rs.6,67,800/-
---------------------------
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
12.The enhanced compensation amount of Rs.2,49,800/-
(Rs.6,67,800/- - Rs.4,18,000/- = Rs.2,49,800/-) is directed to be deposited
along with 7.5% interest within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to
withdraw the same on proper identification. The Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
sms 29.03.2022
To
1.The Principal Sub Judge,
(Motor Accident Claim Tribunal)
Puducherry.
2.The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co.Ltd.,
J.N.Street, Puducherry.
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2158 of 2018
sms
C.M.A.No.2158 of 2018
29.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
