Madras High Court
Minor R.Akilesh vs R.Shoba on 22 November, 2023
Author: M. Dhandapani
Bench: M. Dhandapani
C.M.A.No.4183 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.11.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
C.M.A.No.4183 of 2019
and
C.M.P.No.18671 of 2019
Minor R.Akilesh ... Appellant / Petitioner
Vs.
1.R.Shoba
[since R1 remained exparte before the Tribunal,
her presence may be dispensed with]
2.United India Insurance Company Limited,
No.73, C.M.T.H.Road,
Ambattur,
Thiruvallur – 600 053. ... Respondents / Respondents
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 27.11.2018
made in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1094 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.2, Motor Accidents Claims
Petitions, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.A.Subadra
for M/s.M.Malar
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4183 of 2019
For Respondents : Exparte [R1]
Mr.M.J.Vijayaraaghavan [R2]
*****
JUDGEMENT
The claimant has filed the above appeal seeking an enhancement
of the award granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special
Sub Court No.2, Motor Accidents Claims Petitions, Small Causes Court,
Chennai in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1094 of 2016, dated 27.11.2018.
2. On 24.12.2015 at about 4.30 p.m., while the minor petitioner
was standing in front of his house, the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.TN 02
AW 8425 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, in which
the minor petitioner sustained grievous injuries including fracture, for
which, he was admitted in the hospital and took treatment. Therefore, the
minor claimant filed a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.13,00,000/-
before the Tribunal for the injuries sustained by him.
3. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined two witnesses viz.,
P.W.1 and P.W.2 and marked 10 documents viz., Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10. No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
witnesses were examined nor any documents were marked on the side of
the respondents. On considering the oral and documentary evidence, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to the
claimant. Not satisfied with the same, the present appeal has been
preferred by the claimant.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that
the injuries suffered by the minor appellant are permanent, which has
lasting impact on the day-to-day life of the minor appellant. He also
submitted that P.W.2/doctor through Ex.P.9 has fixed partial permanent
disability of 30%, however, erroneously, without considering the nature
of the injuries and disability, the Tribunal has reduced the same to 20%,
which is wholly erroneous. Further, relying on the decision of the Apex
Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Ors. Vs. Lala & Ors., the quantum
of compensation is grossly inadequate. Therefore, he seeks enhancement
of the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
second respondent/insurance company submitted that the
appellant/claimant was aged about only two years at the time of accident
and the quantum of compensation determined by the Tribunal at
Rs.3,00,000/- is just and reasonable for the injuries sustained by the
claimant as the doctor/P.W.2 had only assessed the disability as partial
permanent in nature and therefore, taking the disability at 20% as
permanent in nature, the Tribunal has awarded compensation, which does
not require any interference.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent and
perused the materials available on record.
7. The accident is not disputed and so also the injuries sustained by
the claimant. The only issue which is disputed is the percentage of
disability and the nature of disability suffered by the claimant. In view of
the fact that the claimant was aged two years at the time of accident, this
Court in order to find the exact percentage of disability, which the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
claimant had suffered taught it fit to refer the claimant to the Medical
Board for its opinion, so that the percentage of disability has to be as on
date, which the disability had lost the life of the claimant. Pursuant to
which, the medical board assessed the physical disability at 42% and
functional disability also at 42%. The accident had occurred in the year
2015, at which point of time, the claimant was aged about two years and
by now, the claimant is aged about ten years. Considering the fact that
the disability suffered by the claimant is beyond 42% and the nature of
injuries suffered has a lasting impact on the day-to-day activities of the
claimant, though it is difficult to have accurate assessment of the
compensation which could be given in respect of the disability suffered
by the claimant, this Court by relying upon the decision of the Apex
Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & Ors. Vs. Lala & Ors. reported in
MANU/SC/0864/2013, a lumpsum compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- could
be fixed as compensation to the claimant.
8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part
and the impugned award of the Tribunal is modified, enhancing the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
compensation from Rs.3,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/-. The second
respondent/insurance company is directed to deposit the said amount to
the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1094 of 2016 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 six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is
directed to deposit the same in an interest yielding fixed deposit with any
one of the Nationalised Banks, initially for a period of three years to be
renewed at periodic intervals until he attains majority and interest
derived from out of the said deposit shall be paid to the
mother/Charumathi of the claimant every quarter to be utilised for the
welfare of the said minor claimant. After attaining majority, it is open to
the claimant to file necessary application to establish the majority, at
which point of time, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the amount in the
fixed deposit directly to the bank account of the appellant/claimant
through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter. The claimant is
directed to pay the necessary Court fee for the enhanced compensation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
amount, if required. No costs. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
22.11.2023
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation Case : Yes / No
sp
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Special Sub Court No.2, Motor
Accidents Claims Petitions), Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.DHANDAPANI, J.,
sp
22.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
