Madras High Court
R.Rathesh vs K.Valaiyapathy on 23 November, 2023
Author: M. Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
C.M.A.No.4297 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.11.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
C.M.A.No.4297 of 2019
R.Rathesh
S/o.Ramanujam ... Appellant /
Petitioner
-Vs-
1. K.Valaiyapathy
2. National Insurance Company,
Motor Third Party Claim Cell,
No. 751, Mount Road, 3rd floor,
Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents / Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.
No.1659 of 2014 dated 18.07.2018 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, (Special Sub Court No.1) Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.D.Pooja
for Mr.K.Varadha Kamaraj
For Respondents : Mr.R.Nithish Kumar for
Mr.R.Ravichandran for R2
R1 - Not Ready Notice
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
C.M.A.No.4297 of 2019
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.
No.1659 of 2014 filed by the claimant, the petitioner has come before this
Court challenging the same by filing the present civil miscellaneous appeal.
2. The Petitioner alleged to be earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month,
met with an accident on 05.02.2013 when the petitioner was riding the
motorcycle, an auto driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
against the petitioner in which the petitioner is alleged to have suffered injuries
for which he was admitted in the hospital and due to the loss suffered on account
of the accident, the claimant, claiming compensation for the injuries suffered
and also for loss of income, had filed the claim petition. The said claim was
resisted by the Insurance Company / second respondent.
3. The claimant had filed the claim petition claiming compensation of a
sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant,
P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Exs.P1 to 15 were marked. The
Insurance Company did not let in any evidence either orally or
documentary. The Tribunal, considering the oral and documentary evidence,
adduced by the claimant and the Insurance Company, awarded a sum of
Rs.72,000/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant / petitioner submits
that the compensation awarded under various heads requires to be reconsidered
and a higher compensation ought to have been awarded to the claimant. It is the
further submission of the learned counsel that the monthly income fixed is on
the lower side, which requires to be reconsidered.
5. The first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent / Insurance
Company submitted that the Tribunal, taking into consideration all the relevant
documents has rightly fixed the compensation, which does not require any
interference.
7. The finding of the Tribunal regarding the negligence has not been
questioned by the appellant and the claimant has filed this appeal questioning
only the quantum of compensation. It is seen from the records that though the
doctor has assessed the disability at 10%, the Tribunal has fixed the disability at
5%. Considering the nature of injuries, this Court is of the view that the
disability ought to have been fixed at 10% and hence, the compensation
awarded under the head disability is enhanced to Rs.30,000/- (10% X
Rs.3,000/-). Further, the compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head pain and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
sufferings is on the lower side and the same is enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. Further,
the Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.5992/- under the medical expenses and the
same is rounded off to Rs.6,000/-. Further, a sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded under
the head loss of future prospectus is not justified since the claimant suffers only
10% of disability and hence, the same is set aside. The compensation awarded
under the other heads are just and the same does not call for interference.
8. In the above circumstances, the compensation awarded under the heads
by the Tribunal is modified as under :-
Head of Amount awarded by Amount awarded
Compensation Tribunal by this Court
(Rs) (Rs)
Disability Rs.15,000/- Rs.30,000/-
Pain and sufferings Rs.15,000/- Rs.25,000/-
Extra nourishment Rs.5,000/- Rs.5,000/-
Transportation Rs.5,000/- Rs.5,000/-
Medical Expenses Rs.5,992/- Rs.6,000/-
Loss of earnings Rs.16,000/- Rs.16,000/-
Loss of future Rs.10,000/- ---
prospectus
Total Rs.71,992 rounded off to Rs.87,000 /-
Rs.72,000/-
9. In the result, this civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed in part and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.72,000/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.87,000/- together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from
the date of filing of claim petition till the date of deposit. The second
respondent / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award
amount now determined by this Court along with interest and costs, less
the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.1659 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, (Special Sub Court No.1), Small Causes Court, Chennai. On
such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the award amount
now determined by this Court, along with interest and costs, less the
amount if any, already withdrawn by making proper application before
the Tribunal. No costs.
23.11.2023
Index: Yes / No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
vji
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
(Special Sub Court No.1)
Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M. DHANDAPANI, J
vji
23.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
