Madras High Court
K.Nanthagopal vs K.Thangavel on 8 December, 2023
Author: M. Dhandapani
Bench: M. Dhandapani
C.M.A.No.1816 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.12.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
C.M.A.No.1816 of 2020
K.Nanthagopal ... Appellant
Vs.
1.K.Thangavel
2.United India Insurance Company Limited,
No.2, Dr.Sankaran Road,
Namakkal Town, Namakkal Taluk. ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgement and Decree dated
06.10.2020 in M.C.O.P.No.906 of 2015 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Nalliyappan
For Respondents : No appearance [R1]
Mr.A.Dhiraviyanathan [R2]
*****
JUDGEMENT
The claimant is before this Court seeking an enhancement of the
award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
District Judge), Namakkal in M.C.O.P.No.906 of 2015, dated
06.10.2020.
2. As per the claim petition, on 14.05.2015 at about 3.30 p.m.,
when the claimant was proceeding on the Dharmapuri – Salem four lane
road riding a Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle, a mini bus bearing
Reg.No.TN-30-AW-9969 belonging to the first respondent and insured
with the second respondent, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent
manner and without exhibiting any signal, suddenly applied brake, as a
result of which, the claimant's motorcycle rammed on the rear side of the
bus resulting in an accident. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained
grievous injuries. Thereafter, he filed a claim petition before the Tribunal
claiming a total compensation of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for the injuries
sustained by him in the said accident in M.C.O.P.No.906 of 2015.
3. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1
examined the doctor as P.W.2 and marked 9 documents viz., Ex.P.1 to
Ex.P.9. On the side of the second respondent/insurance company, they
have examined two witnesses viz., R.W.1 and R.W.2 and marked 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
documents viz., Ex.R.1 and Ex.R.2. After adjudication, the Tribunal by
its award dated 06.10.2020 awarded compensation in a sum of
Rs.50,000/- with an interest of 7.5% p.a. Not satisfied with the same, the
claimant has preferred the present appeal.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant
submitted that, though P.W.2 assessed the disability of the claimant at
25% on the ground that the claimant had sustained injuries on jaws and
cheek, however, the Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards
disability, which is wholly unsustainable. He further submitted that the
compensation awarded under the various heads are meagre and the same
requires to be enhanced. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the appeal.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent submitted that, by considering all the materials on records,
the Tribunal has awarded compensation in favour of the claimant under
various heads, which are just and reasonable and the same does not
require any interference. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the
appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant
as well as the second respondent/insurance company and also perused the
materials available on record.
7. A perusal of the entire papers including the award passed by the
Tribunal below would show that the Tribunal had arrived at a conclusion
that no medical record was placed before the Tribunal to establish the
disability of the claimant assessed by the doctor/P.W.2. Further, a perusal
of wound certificate and discharge summary, which are marked as Ex.P.2
and Ex.P.3 reveals that the claimant has sustained only lacerated injuries
all over his body and no fracture over the jaws and cheek. Hence, in the
absence of clinching medical evidence to establish that the injuries
sustained by the claimant has caused disability to him, the Tribunal has
rightly not awarded any amount towards disability, which appears to be
in order. Further, this Court is of the view that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal under the various heads are just and reasonable and does
not require interference. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere
with the award passed by the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and
the judgment and decree dated 06.10.2020 made in M.C.O.P.No.905 of
2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional
District Judge), Namakkal is confirmed. The second respondent/
insurance company is directed to deposit the award amount as awarded
by the Tribunal to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.906 of 2015 along with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till
the date of deposit and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the
amount, if any already deposited, within a period of two (2) weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being
made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the said amount directly to the
bank account of the appellant/claimant through RTGS within a period of
two (2) weeks thereafter. No costs.
08.12.2023
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation Case : Yes / No
sp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.DHANDAPANI, J.,
sp
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge),
Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
08.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
