Madras High Court
Selvaraju vs Manickam on 14 June, 2023
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
0IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 14.06.2023
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
CMA.No.444 of 2022
Selvaraju
... Appellant
Vs.
1.Manickam
2.Ravi
3.The United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Ranga Buildings, 104-A, Floor No.2,
Peramanur Main Road, Four Roads,
Salem-636 007.
... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 praying to enhance the award in the order dated 04.12.2021 made in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No. 904 of 2020 on the file of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims
Tribunal/ Special Subordinate Judge No-I, Salem.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Paraneedharan
RR1 and 2 : Ex-parte
For R-3 : Mr.C. Paranthaman
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed to enhance the award in the order dated 04.12.2021 made
in M.A.C.T.O.P.No. 904 of 2020 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal/ Special Subordinate Judge No-I, Salem.
2. The claimant has filed the above appeal for enhancement of compensation.
According to the claimant, on 03.07.2020, while he was riding his scooter,
bearing Reg.No. TN 28 BA 6112, the driver of a Chaverolet car bearing Reg.No.
TN 30 AC 5455 drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the claimant vehicle, due to which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries.
According to the claimant, he was aged 52 years at the time of accident and as a
Elementary School Teacher, he was earning a sum of Rs.72,000/- per month. The
claimant therefore filed a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as
compensation.
3. The first and second respondents remained ex-parte before the Claims
Tribunal and the claim petition was contested by the third respondent/Insurance
Company.
4. The third respondent/ Insurance company, in its counter affidavit, denied
all the averments made in the claim petition, apart from disputing the negligence,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
quantum and liability.
5. Before the Claims Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as P.W.1 and
marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.21 in support of his case. The third respondent/Insurance
company did not adduce any oral evidence, but marked one document, Ex.R.1. The
disability certificate issued by the Medical Board was marked as Ex.C.1.
6. The Claims Tribunal, on an assessment of entire evidence on record,
rendered a finding of negligence against the first respondent, the driver of the
Chevrolet car.
7. The Claims Tribunal assessed the compensation at Rs.1,91,538/- along
with 7.5% interest and mulcted the liability on the third respondent/ Insurance
company, who is the insurer of the second respondent's vehicle. Not satisfied with
the award passed by the Claims Tribunal, the claimant has filed the above appeal
seeking for enhancement of compensation.
8. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the award of the
Claims Tribunal under various heads was meagre and the amounts need to be
enhanced. The learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal failed to note
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
that the claimant suffered head injuries and was hospitalised for 12 days. The
learned counsel therefore submitted that considering the nature of the injuries
sustained by the claimant and the hospitalisation period, the compensation towards
the heads pain and suffering, transportation charges, nutritious food, attender and
loss of amenities need to be enhanced.
9. The learned counsel for the third respondent/Insurance company on the
other hand, submitted that the award passed by the Claims Tribunal was just, fair
and reasonable and did not call for any interference by this Court.
10. I have heard both the learned counsel and have perused the materials
placed on record.
11. The Claims Tribunal, on the basis of Ex.C.1, disability certificate,
assessed the disability at 10%. The nature of injuries sustained by the claimant as
per Ex.C.1 are as follows :
"Diagnosis and treatment: Head injury- # temporal bone/ conservative Rx.
Multiple SDH/SAH
# (R) Zygomatic arch
# (R) clavicle - ORIF (R) clavicle
# 2 - 8 ribs (R) - ICD done"
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
The Medical Board, for the above injuries, assessed the disability at 10% . The
Claims Tribunal relied on the Judgment of this Court in the case of
M.Chinnathambi Vs. S.Deepa reported in 2020 (1) TN MAC 617 and awarded
Rs.5000 per percentage of disability. Hence, I find no infirmity in the award of
Rs.50,000/- towards permanent disability assessed by the Claims Tribunal.
12. As far as compensation towards the other heads are concerned, it is seen
that the claimant was hospitalised for 12 days and therefore in my view, the
claimant would be entitled to enhanced sums towards attender charges,
transportation and nutritious food. With respect to the other heads, the award of the
Claims Tribunal is confirmed.
13. In the above said discussion the award of the Claims Tribunal is modified
as follows.
S.No. Various Heads Award by Tribunal Award by this
(amount in Rs.) Court
(amount in Rs.)
1. Pain and Suffering 25,000/- 30,000/-
2. Medical expenses 65,538/- 65,538/-
3. Transportation charges 10,000/- 15,000/-
4. Nutritious food 10,000/- 15,000/-
5. Attender charges 10,000/- 15,000/-
6. Damages to clothes 1,000/- 1,000/-
7. Loss of amenities 20,000/- 25,000/-
8. Permanent disability 50,000/- 50,000/-
Total Compensation 1,91,538/- 2,16,538/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
The claimant is entitled to Rs.2,16,538/- as enhanced compensation along with
7.5% interest.
14. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that award of the
Tribunal has not been deposited by the third respondent/Insurance Company. In
view of the said submission, a direction is issued to the third respondent to deposit
the enhanced compensation along with 7.5% interest within a period of six (6)
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being
made, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount.
In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. There shall
be no order as to costs.
14.06.2022
dsn
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order: Yes/No
Neutral citation: Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
To
The Special Subordinate Judge No-I,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Salem.
Copy to
The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
N.MALA.J.,
dsn
C.M.A.No.444 of 2022
14.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
