Madras High Court

Reliance General Ins.Co.Ltd vs T.Ravi on 18 July, 2023

                                                                                   CMA No. 1790 / 2022

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                       DATED: 18.07.2023

                                                           CORAM :

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                         Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1790 of 2022
                                                             and
                                                  C.M.P. No. 12946 of 2022

                     Reliance General Ins.Co.Ltd.,
                     2nd Floor, Door No.12, H 2035 15th Main road,
                     Anna Nagar West, Chennai 600 040                                  ... Appellant

                                                             Versus

                     1.T.Ravi

                     2.M.Velu                                                 ... Respondents

                     PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
                     Motor Vehicles Act, 59 of 1988 seeking to set aside the decree and
                     Judgment dated 09.07.2021 passed in M.C.O.P. No. 22 of 2018, by the
                     Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Judge at Madurantakam.


                                  For Appellant        : Ms. C. Bhuvanasundari.

                                  For Respondents      : Mr. K. Govi Ganesan for R1.

                                                  No appearance for R2.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/9
                                                                                      CMA No. 1790 / 2022




                                             JUDGMENT

The appeal has been filed by the insurance company challenging

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P. No. 22 of 2018

dated 09.07.2021.

2.The first respondent / petitioner had filed a claim petition stating

that on 19.07.2015 at about 09.30 p.m., while the petitioner was

travelling as a pillion rider in a two wheeler ridden by his friend from

Cheyyur to Iraniyachithi Village at Chengattu Pond, a dog crossed the

road and the two wheeler hit the dog and the petitioner had fallen from

the two wheeler as a result of which the petitioner sustained grievious

injuries all over the body and thus he is entitled for compensation.

3.The appellant filed a counter denying all the averments made in

the claim petition and stated that in any case, the claim was excessive.

4.The second respondent remained ex-parte before the tribunal.

Though notice has been served, none has entered appearance on behalf of

him.

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

CMA No. 1790 / 2022

5.The first respondent / petitioner examined one witness on his side

and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10 and M.O.1 series. No witness was

examined and no document was marked on the side of the appellant. The

disability certificate issued by the Medical Board was marked as Ex.C.1.

6.The Tribunal after considering the evidence and documents filed

on the side of the first respondent / petitioner awarded a compensation of

Rs.14,62,000/- to be paid by the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order,

the appellant had preferred the instant appeal.

7.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal

after calculating the loss of future earning by adopting multiplier method

ought not to have fixed the compensation under the head disability once

again. The learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal had not

justified the award under the head Loss of Earning since the multiplier

method was adopted to assess the loss of earnings. Hence, the learned

counsel submitted that the compensation awarded under these two heads

are erroneous and the over all compensation has to be reduced

accordingly.

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

CMA No. 1790 / 2022

8.The learned counsel for the first respondent per contra submitted

that the Tribunal was justified in awarding the compensation under the

various heads and there is no reason to interfere with the award. Further,

merely because the Tribunal had adopted multiplier method to award

compensation for loss of future earning, it cannot be said that the

compensation cannot be awarded for disability and loss of earnings.

9.This Court on perusal of the impugned award finds that the

Tribunal had accepted the disability certificate issued by the Medical

Board and assessing the disability at 73% and adopted multiplier method.

The Tribunal had taken into consideration the fact that the petitioner was

totally incapacitated and in the disability certificate issued by the medical

board found that the petitioner suffered locomotor disability and he had

also undergone multiple surgeries for the injuries suffered by him.

Considering the fact that the petitioner suffered injuries in the lower limb

and had a disability in the lower limb and the fact that the petitioner was

working as an agricultural coolie, found that the petitioner suffered 60%

loss of earning capacity. Thus, the Tribunal fixed the disability at 60%. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CMA No. 1790 / 2022

There is no infirmity in the said finding of the Tribunal considering the

nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner, the multiple surgeries

undergone by him and the disability certificate issued by the Medical

Board. The Tribunal therefore was justified in adopting the multiplier

method. The accident is of the year 2015 and the notional income

adopted by the Tribunal at Rs.7,500/- for an agricultural coolie is also

justified. The age of the petitioner was 46 and hence, 25% is added

towards future prospects and the multiplier adopted is '13'. Thus, the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of future earning at

Rs.8,77,500/- (Rs.7,500/- + 25% X 60% X 12 X 13) is just.

10.As regards the compensation under the head 'disability', this

Court finds that there is no justification for the said compensation.

Having adopted multiplier method, the Tribunal in the absence of any

evidence to justify the said claim ought not to have awarded the

compensation. Hence, the compensation under this head has to be set

aside.

11.As regards the loss of earnings, this Court finds that the

Tribunal has assessed the loss of earnings for the period of treatment. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CMA No. 1790 / 2022

The reasons given by the Tribunal is that the petitioner was taking

treatment for nearly one year and hence, the compensation under the

head loss of earning was fixed at Rs.7,500/- X 12 = Rs.90,000/-.

Considering the nature of injury suffered by the petitioner, this Court is of

the view that the loss of earnings can be calculated for a period of six

months and thus, the loss of earnings is fixed at Rs.45,000/- (Rs.7,500/-

X 6). Further, the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- awarded under the head pain

and sufferings is excessive and thus, the same is reduced to Rs.1,50,000/-

. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads are

just and remains unaltered. Thus, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is modified as follows:

                            S. No Description        Amount            Amount       Award
                                                    awarded by       awarded by confirmed
                                                     Tribunal         this Court or enhanced
                                                       (Rs)              (Rs)     or granted
                            1.    Transportation           10,000        10,000     Confirmed
                            2.    Extra                      7,000        7,000     Confirmed
                                  Nourishment
                            3.    Loss of Earning          90,000        45,000      Reduced
                            4.    Loss of Future          8,77,500     8,77,500     Confirmed
                                  Earning
                            5.    Attendant                  7,500        7,500     Confirmed
                                  Charges
                            6.    Pain and                2,00,000     1,50,000      Reduced
                                  Sufferings

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

                                                                                       CMA No. 1790 / 2022


                            7.         Disability              2,50,000          ---       Deleted
                            8.        Future Medical            20,000       20,000      Confirmed
                                      Expenses
                                      Total                  14,62,000    11,17,000 Reduced by
                                                                                    Rs.3,45,000/-

13. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is

partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at

Rs.14,62,000/- is hereby reduced to Rs.11,17,000/- 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 appellant is directed to deposit the

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, if not already

deposited and permitted to withdraw the excess amount if any deposited

earlier. On such deposit the first respondent is permitted to withdraw the

award amount along with proportionate interest and costs, less the

amount if any, already withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the