Madras High Court
Usha vs Harikrishnan on 29 September, 2023
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.09.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2128 of 2023
Usha ... Appellant
Versus
1.Harikrishnan
2.L&T / HDFC General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
New No. 528, Old No.559, 2nd Floor,
Annasalai, Teynampet,
Chennai – 600018. ... 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. 2271 of 2017 dated 10.11.2021 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr. S. Thambi.
For Respondents : Mr. L. Rajasekar for R1.
Mr. N. Somasundar for R2.
JUDGMENT
The claimant has preferred the instant appeal seeking enhancement
of compensation in the award passed by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.
No.2271 of 2017 dated 10.11.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
2. The claimant / appellant has filed the claim petition stating that
on 02.01.2017 at about 7.30 hrs, while the appellant was walking in a
public road and while crossing the road from South to North direction, a
car belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second
respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the
appellant, as a result of which the appellant sustained grievous injuries.
3.The first respondent filed a counter stating that the accident took
place only due to the negligence of the deceased; and that in any case, the
vehicle was insured with the second respondent and the second
respondent is liable to pay compensation.
4.The second respondent filed a counter stating that the accident
took place only due to the negligence of the appellant as she had
suddenly crossed the road; and that in any case, the compensation
claimed was excessive and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
5.The appellant examined PW1 and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9. The
respondents neither examined any witness nor marked any document.
The disability certificate issued by the Medical Board is marked as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
Ex.C.1.
6.The Tribunal after taking into consideration the oral and
documentary evidence held that the accident took place due to the
negligence of the driver of the car insured with the second respondent
and directed the second respondent to pay a compensation of
Rs.10,00,600/- to the appellant.
7.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the accident
took place in the year 2017. The appellant's left foot was amputated and
the Medical Board has assessed 37% permanent disability; that the
appellant is unable to pursue her avocation and the Tribunal had rightly
adopted multiplier method; that, however the notional income fixed was
meagre; and that the award of compensation under the other heads are
also meagre and sought for enhancement.
8.Heard the learned counsel for the first respondent. The learned
counsel for the second respondent, per contra, submitted that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no
interference is called for.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
9.The only question that arises for consideration in the instant
appeal is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable.
10.On perusal of the records, it is seen that the appellant had
suffered the following injuries; 'injury in left leg and crush injury over
left foot and amputation of I, II, III MTP left foot and SSG done and K-
wire fixed and Multiple injuries all over the body' as per Ex.P.3,
discharge summary. The appellant was examined by the Medical Board
which had issued Ex.C.1, disability certificate. The Medical Board had
observed as follows; 'Post Traumatic Sequelae – Left Foot due to RTA
Crush Injury Left Foot, Amputation of 1st, 2nd, 3rd Toes Left. As far as the
percentage of disability is concerned, 37% was assessed'. Considering
the fact that the left foot was amputated, this Court is of the view the
fixing the functional disability at 37% is justified. Hence, no interference
is called for in the said finding. As regards the notional income, this
Court is of the view that considering the fact that the appellant had
established that she was a curry leaf seller as per Ex.P.7, identity card
issued by the Curry Leaf Trader Welfare Association, this Court is of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
view that it would be just and reasonable to fix Rs.12,000/- per month as
notional income. Since the appellant was aged 35 years, she is entitled to
40% enhancement towards future prospects and the multiplier applicable
is 16. Therefore, the compensation under the head disability would be
Rs.12,000 + 4,800 = Rs.16,800/- X 12 X 16 X 37/100 = Rs.11,93,472/-
rounded off to Rs.11,93,500/-. Further, it is seen that the Tribunal was
right in awarding compensation under the head loss of income for a
period of three months. Hence, the compensation under the head loss of
income would be Rs.36,000/- (Rs.12,000 X 3). It is further seen that the
Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards pain and sufferings and
Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony. Since it would amount to
duplication, award under the head mental agony is set aside and the
compensation under the head pain and sufferings is enhanced to
Rs.50,000/- considering the nature of injuries and amputation suffered by
the appellant. Further, the compensation under the head Loss of
Amenities is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-, the compensation under the head
Transportation is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- and the compensation under
the head Attender Charges is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-. The award under
the other heads are just and the same are confirmed. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
S. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded awarded by confirmed or
by this Court enhanced or
Tribunal (Rs) granted
(Rs)
1. Disability 8,95,104 11,93,500 Enhanced
2. Loss of Income 27,000 36,000 Confirmed
3. Pain and sufferings 15,000 50,000 Enhanced
4. Transport Expenses 7,500 15,000 Enhanced
5. Nutrition expenses 20,000 20,000 Confirmed
6. Damages to Clothes 1,000 1,000 Confirmed
7. Attender Charges 15,000 30,000 Enhanced
8. Loss of amenities 10,000 50,000 Enhanced
9. Mental agony 10,000 --- Set aside
Total 10,00,604 13,95,500 Enhanced by
rounded Rs.3,94,900/-.
off to
10,00,600
11.With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.10,00,600/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.13,95,500/-, 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 second respondent 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
period of six (6) weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this
Judgment. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the
award amount, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the
amount already withdrawn, if any. The appellant is directed to pay the
necessary Court fee, if any on the enhanced award amount. No costs.
29.09.2023
ay
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 2128 / 2023
SUNDER MOHAN, J
ay
C.M.A. No. 2128 of 2023
Dated: 29.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
