Madras High Court

Thulasi Raman vs B.Sagayaraj on 25 August, 2023

                                                                         C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   Dated: 25.08.2023

                                                 CORAM:
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                      Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1967 of 2023


                         Thulasi Raman                              ... Appellant


                                                          Vs.


                         1.B.Sagayaraj
                         2.Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
                            No.6, Haddows Road,
                            Nungambakkam.
                            Chennai - 600 06.                          ... Respondents

                         PRAYER : The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section
                         173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree
                         dated 28.03.2022 in MCOP.No.2127 of 2017 on the file of the Motor
                         Accident Claims Tribunal, V-Court of Small Causes, Chennai.


                                       For Appellant    : Mr.Amar D.Pandiya


                                       For Respondents : Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan for R2
                                                  Notice to R1 is dispensed with




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis




                         1/10
                                                                                C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023



                                                    JUDGMENT

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant

challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in

MCOP.No.2127 of 2017, dated 28.03.2022, on the file of the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, V-Court of Small Causes, Chennai

2. The appellant is the claimant in MCOP.No.2127 of 2017 on

the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V-Court of Small

Causes, Chennai. He filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of

Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the grevious injuries sustained by

the him in the accident that took place on 22.10.2015.

3.3. According to the appellant, on 22.10.2015 at about 06.30 hrs. while the

appellant was driving his two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-85-AY-1805

in Velachery Kanigapuram from North to South, the driver of the car bearing

Registration N.TN-22-CL-3044 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner

and hit against the two wheeler of the appellant. Due to the said impact, the

appellant sustained multiple injuries. Therefore, the appellant filed the claim

petition claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation.

4. The first respondent, the owner of the offending vehicle,

remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023

5. The second respondent/Insurance Company filed counter

statement denying all the averments made in the claim petition and

stated that the accident did not happen due to the rash and negligent

driving by the driver of the car and in any event, the compensation

claimed by the appellant is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the

claim petition.

6. Before the Tribunal, the appellant examined himself as

P.W.2 and marked thirteen documents as Exs.P1 to P13. On the side

of the second respondent/ Insurance Company neither oral nor

documentary evidence was adduced. The Certificate issued by the

Medical Board is marked as Ex.C-1.

7. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and

documentary evidence held that the accident occured due to the rash

and negligent act of driver of the first respondent's vehicle and

directed the second respondent, being the insurer of the offending

vehicle to pay a sum of Rs.1,54,800/- as compensation to the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023

appellant. Aggrieved over the said award, the appellant has preferred

the instant appeal.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

award of the Tribunal is meagre. Considering the fact that the

appellant had suffered fractures in both bones in the right leg, the

Tribunal ought to have awarded higher compensation under all the

heads and hence, prayed for enhancement of the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the first

respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal and therefore,

requested this Court to dispense with the notice to the first respondent

and had also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.

Hence, notice to the first respondent is dispensed with.

10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second

respondent/Insurance Company submitted that the award of the

Tribunal is just and reasonable and therefore, does not call for any

interference and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023

11. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as

well as the learned counsel appearing for the second

respondent/Insurance Company and perused all the materials

available on record before this Court.

12. The only question involved in this case is whether the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?

13. Admittedly, the appellant had suffered fractures in both

the bones in the right leg. The appellant had deposed before the

Tribunal that he was working as a driver. However, no income proof

was produced by the appellant. The appellant was also treated as an

in-patient for nearly twenty eight (28) days. The disability was

assessed by the Medical Board at 16%. The Tribunal had awarded

Rs.4,000/- per percentage of disability which is justified. However,

the compensation under the head “Loss of amenities” and “Pain and

suffering”, “Extra nourishment” and “Transport expenses” can be

enhanced to Rs.30,000/-, Rs.30,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively.

Though the appellant had not produced any evidence to prove his

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023

income, considering his avocation and the year of accident, the

monthly notional income of Rs.12,000/- can be fixed. Considering the

nature of injuries, this Court is inclined to fix the treatment period as

six (6) months for assessing “Loss of income”. Therefore, the

appellant is entitled to Rs.72,000/- (6 x Rs.12,000) under the head

“Loss of income”. Since, he was hospitalised for 28 days, he is

entitled to attendant charges of Rs.20,000/-. The award of Tribunal

under other heads are just and reasonable and the same are confirmed.

14. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

modified as follows:

                           S.N Description         Amount          Amount           Award
                            o                     awarded by     awarded by      confirmed or
                                                   Tribunal       this Court     enhanced or
                                                     (Rs)            (Rs)         granted or
                                                                                   reduced
                           1.     Disability            64,000         64,000 Confirmed
                           2.     Loss of               15,000         30,000 Enhanced
                                  amenities
                           3.     Pain and              15,000         30,000 Enhanced
                                  suffering
                           4.     Extra                 10,000         20,000 Enhanced
                                  nourishment
                                  &
                                  transportatio
                                  n
                           5.     Damages to             1,000          1,000 Confirmed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis





                                                                            C.M.A.No.1967 of 2023



                                  clothes
                           6.     Loss of             40,000           72,000 Enhanced
                                  income
                           7.     Attender             9,800           20,000 Enhanced
                                  charges
                                  Total         Rs.1,54,800/-   Rs.2,37,000/- Enhanced    by
                                                                              Rs.82,200/-

15. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly

allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at

Rs.1,54,800/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.2,37,000/- together with

interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum (excluding the default period, if

any) from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The appellant is

directed to pay necessary Court fee, if any, on the enhanced

compensation. The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed

to deposit the modified award amount now determined by this Court

along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited if

any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to

withdraw the award amount along with interest and costs, after