Madras High Court
Anson vs The Managing Director on 10 August, 2023
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.08.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
Anson ... Appellant
Vs
The Managing Director,
Metropolitan Transport Corporation [Ltd],
Pallavan House, Pallavan Salai,
Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 13.02.2023 in
MACT.O.P.No.2796 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, in the IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Ayyadurai
For Respondent : Mr.Vinoth Raj
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant
challenging the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the
award dated 13.02.2023 made in MACT.O.P. No.2796 of 2018 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The appellant filed M.C.O.P. No.2796 of 2018 on the file of the
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai
claiming a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained
by him in the accident that took place on 07.04.2018.
3. According to the appellant, on the date of accident, i.e.
07.04.2018 while he was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-
04-AS-5419, at Rajaji Salai, in front of Parrys Building, Chennai, the driver
of the bus bearing Registration No.TN-01-AN-0616 belonging to the
respondent, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and hit against
the motorcycle and caused the accident. In the above said accident, the
appellant / Anson sustained grievous injuries and hence filed claim petition
claiming compensation against the respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
4. The respondent filed counter statement denying all the
averments made by the appellant in the claim petition. According to the
respondent, accident occurred only due to the negligent act of the
motorcyclist who drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner without
wearing helmet, lost his control and invited the accident. Hence, the
respondent is not liable to pay compensation to the appellant. The total
compensation claimed by the appellant is excessive and prayed for dismissal
of the claim petition.
5. The appellant examined himself as PW1 and one
Dr.K.J.Mathiazhagan, was examined as PW2. Eleven documents were
marked as Exs.P.1 to Exs.P.11. On the side of the respondent, one Magesh /
Driver of the bus was examined as RW1 and no document was marked.
6. The Tribunal after considering the evidence and documents
filed on the side of the appellant, awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- as
compensation to the appellant. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the
appellant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
7. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though the
appellant had marked the discharge summary / Ex.P3, which shows that the
appellant suffered fracture in the ribs 5th, 6th and 7th, the Tribunal had
erroneously reduced the percentage of disability fixed by P.W.2 / Doctor.
The Tribunal had assessed the disability at 5% and awarded Rs.5,000/- per
percentage of disability. The Tribunal had also not awarded compensation
towards loss of amenities, pain and sufferings, transportation charges, extra
nourishment and attendant charges. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed
for enhancement of compensation.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent / Insurance
Company submitted that the appellant was not examined by the Medical
Board. P.W.2 is a private doctor, his evidence cannot be accepted and
therefore, the Tribunal had rightly fixed the percentage of disability as 5%.
The learned counsel therefore submitted that the award of the Tribunal is
just and reasonable and there is no reason to interfere with the same and
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
9. The only question in the instant appeal is -
Whether the award of compensation by the Tribunal
is just and reasonable?
10. The appellant had taken treatment in Government Stanley
Hospital, Chennai. The discharge summary was marked as Ex.P3. As per
the discharge summary, the appellant suffered fracture on the right scapula,
5th 6th and 7th ribs. P.W.2 / Doctor, had assessed the disability at 25%. In a
similar case, the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.Perumal Vs. K.Ambika and Ors.
reported in 2015 (1) TN MAC 337 (SC) had accepted the evidence of
Doctor assessing the disability at 25% for fracture in the 5 th to 8th ribs. In
the light of the above, though P.W.2 was a private Doctor, the Tribunal
ought not to have discarded his evidence and reduced the percentage of the
disability to 5%. This Court is of the view that the award does not disclose
any reason for discarding except for stating that the appellant was not
subjected to examination by the Medical Board. Considering the nature of
injuries namely fractures in the ribs 5th, 6th and 7th besides in the scapula,
this Court is of the view that P.W.2's evidence has to be accepted.
Therefore, the disability is assessed as 25%. The appellant is entitled to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
Rs.5,000/- for a percentage of disability as the accident took place in the
year 2018.
11. Therefore, the compensation under the head disability
has to be Rs.5,000 X 25 = 1,25,000/-. The appellant is entitled to
Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of
amenities, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation expenses, Rs.5,000/- towards
extra nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges. Considering
the nature of injuries, the notional income of the deceased is taken as
Rs.10,000/-. Therefore, the loss of income during the period of treatment is
taken as one month at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced in the following
manner:
Sl. No Description Amount Amount Award confirmed
awarded by awarded by or enhanced or
Tribunal this Court granted
(Rs) (Rs)
1. Disability 50,000/- 1,25,000/- Enhanced
2. Pain and 10,000/- Enhanced
Sufferings
3. Transportation 5,000/- Enhanced
Expenses
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
4. Extra 5,000/- Enhanced
Nourishment
5. Medical - Enhanced
Expenses
6. Attendant 5,000/- Granted
Charges
7. Loss of - 10,000/- Granted
Amenities
8. Loss of Income - 10,000/- Granted
during the
treatment
period
Total 50,000/- 1,70,000/- Enhanced
by Rs.1,20,000/-
12. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.50,000/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.1,70,000/- together with interest at
7.5% per annum (excluding the default period, if any) from the date of
petition till the date of deposit. The respondent / Transport Corporation is
directed to deposit the enhanced award amount, now determined by this
Court along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if
any, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of
this Judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the
same, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
already withdrawn. The appellant is directed to pay the necessary Court
Fee, if any, on the enhanced award amount. No costs.
10.08.2023
Index: Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
AT
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
AT
C.M.A.No.1085 of 2023
10.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
