Madras High Court
Jaya Sandhya @ Sandiya vs Subramanian on 10 October, 2022
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
Jaya Sandhya @ Sandiya .. Appellant
-Vs.-
1. Subramanian
2.The New India Assurance Company Limited,
Thirty Party Motor Claims Office,
No.45, Moore Street,
Chennai 600 001 ...Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2016 and made
in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.512 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Subordinate Judge, Ponneri.
For Appellant : Ms.M.Malar
For Respondent-1 : Ex-parte
For Respondent-2 : Mr.J.Chandran
JUDGMENT
The claimant is the appellant before this Court seeking enhancement
of the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ponneri in
M.C.O.P.No.512 of 2013.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
2. The main ground of challenge to the said Award is that the
Tribunal has not taken into account the evidence of P.W2-Doctor, who had
in Ex.P15-Disability Certificate stated that the appellant had suffered from a
hearing loss.
3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that
the Tribunal has ignored both Ex.P5-Continuous treatment certificate and
P15-Disability certificate. Therefore, a very meagre amount has been given
under the head of permanent disability.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company on
the other hand would submit that the hearing loss has not been mentioned
either in Ex.P2-Accident Register, Ex.P3-Discharge Summary or Ex.P5-
Continuous treatment certificate. The injuries that have been described as
follows:
1. Head injury.
2. Left Parietal SAH
3. Left Temporal Contusion
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
4. Right temporal parietal fracture and multiple
abrasion and contusion injuries all over the
body grievous in nature.
Nowhere is there any mention about about the hearing loss. The same has
been introduced only in Ex.P15-Disability Certificate. Though under
Ex.P15, the disability has been assessed at 60%, the Tribunal has fixed the
disability of the petitioner at 45%. A perusal of Ex.P15 would show that
under head of hearing impairment, the Tribunal has assessed the disability
at 25%. Considering the fact that there is no reference to hearing loss in the
discharge summary issued by the hospital and for the first time, the loss of
hearing has been introduced in Ex.P6-Hearing report, which has been issued
nearly 1 year and 5 months after the accident, the same cannot be taken note
of. That apart, Ex.P15 does not make any reference to a road accident being
the cause for the hearing loss. Therefore, the argument advanced by the
learned counsel of the appellant has to necessarily be rejected.
5. Be that as it may, taking into account the period of treatment
undergone as an inpatient and the injuries sustained by the petitioner, the
amount under the head of pain and suffering is enhanced to a sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
Rs.40,000/- as against a sum of Rs.25,000/-, the amount granted under the
head of Rich and Nutritious Food is enhanced to a sum of Rs.15,000/-. No
amounts have been granted by the Tribunal under the head of loss of
amenities, therefore, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is granted under this head.
Therefore, the total compensation now stands at a sum of Rs.3,27,990/- as
follows:
Heads Amount by the Amount Awarded by
Tribunal this Court
in Rs. in Rs.
Pain and suffering 25,000 40,000
Medical expenses 1,17,990 1,17,990
Rich and nutritious food 10,000 15,000
Transport Expenses 10,000 10,000
Permanent disability 1,35,000 1,35,000
Loss of amenities - 10,000
Total 2,97,990 3,27,990
6. The appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award of the
Tribunal is modified, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,97,990
to Rs.3,27,990. The second respondent-Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the said amount to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.512 of 2013 along with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
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 claimant is
permitted to withdraw the award amount, along with accrued interest and
costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already
withdrawn, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal. The
claimant is directed to pay the Court fee for the enhanced compensation
amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not disburse the enhanced
amount till such time as the certified copy showing proof of payment of
Court fee has been produced by the claimant. In other respects, the Award
of the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. There shall be no order as to costs in
the present appeal.
10.10.2022
srn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
P.T.ASHA, J.,
srn
To
1. The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ponneri.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.1356 of 2017
10.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
