Madras High Court
M.Ezhumalai vs G.Anandan on 4 January, 2024
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.2496 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
C.M.A.No.2496 of 2023
M.Ezhumalai .. Appellant
Vs.
1.G.Anandan
2.The Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Rais Tower, Plot No.2054, 2nd Avenue,
Anna Nagar,
Chennai- 600 040. .. Respondents
(No relief sought against the 1st respondent.)
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
20.12.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.242 of 2012 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Judge,Kanchipuram.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Sivakumar
For Respondents : Notice Dispensed with (R1)
Mr.G.Vasudevan (R2)
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2496 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 20.12.2019 made in
M.C.O.P.No.242 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Subordinate Judge, Kanchipuram.
2.The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.242 of 2012 on the file
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Judge,
Kanchipuram. He filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation on account of the injuries sustained by him in
the accident that took place on 07.06.2012.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the Tipper Lorrry bearing Registration No.TN-73-X-2898 who is
the first respondent herein and directed the 2nd respondent-Insurance
Company to pay a sum of Rs.5,48,600/- as compensation to the appellant.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
appellant has come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that due to
the aforesaid accident, the appellant sustained injury in the right femur and
fracture in the left eye and though the Medical Board assessed disability of
the claimant @ 60% and issued Ex.P21, the Tribunal without considering the
same has fixed disability only @ 40%. He further submitted that the claimant
was an agriculturist and was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month and
Claims Tribunal has fixed the notional income of the injured only at
Rs.6,000/- per month and awarded meager compensation towards Loss of
Income. He further submitted that amount of compensation awarded towards
other heads are also very low and hence prayed for enhancement of
compensation.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance
Company submitted that the Claims Tribunal, taking into consideration of the
fact that disability of the claimant, cannot be said to be permanent in nature
and based on the age, prevailing, continuing ailments and hardship of the
claimant, has rightly fixed disability at 40% and as there was no proof for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
monthly income of the claimant, the Tribunal has rightly fixed a sum of
Rs.6,000/- per month as notional monthly income of the claimant. He further
submitted that the Claims Tribunal after considering oral and documentary
evidence has rightly awarded compensation under various heads and therefore
the same does not warrant any inteference
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials on record.
8. It is no doubt true that due to the injuries sustained by the Claimant,
he could not walk properly and carry any agricultural activities for six
months, therefore the percentage of disability can be considered even as 100%
for the purpose of determining the compensation. But as the Medical Board
has assessed 60% disability, which is not permanent in nature, the Claims
Tribunal on considering the age, prevailing, continuing ailments and hardship
of the claimant, has rightly fixed disability at 40% and
therefore this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. It is the case of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the appellant that at the time of accident, the injured was earning a sum of
Rs.10,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has fixed the income of the appellant
at Rs.6,000/- which in the opinion of this Court is very low. The accident took
place in the year 2012. The cost of living has been increased enormously and
salary of even unskilled workers being increased substantially. Hence, a sum
of Rs.9,000/- per month is fixed as notional income of the deceased.
Therefore, by fixing a sum of Rs.9,000/- per month and by taking the
disability @40% and by adopting the multiplier 9, compensation towards
Loss of Income comes to Rs.3,88,800/- (9000x12x40/100x9) and therefore a
sum of Rs.3,88,800/- is awarded towards Loss for Income.
9. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are just and
reasonable and hence, the same are hereby confirmed. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of income 2,59,200/- 3,88,800/- Enhanced
2. Medical Expenses 2,70,000/- 2,70,000/- Confirmed
3. Attender charges 2,400/- 2,400/- Confirmed
4. Pain and Sufferings 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
5. Extra nourishment 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
6. Transportation 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
7. Cloth damates 2,000/- 2,000/- Confirmed
Total Rs.5,48,600/- Rs.6,78,200/- Enhanced by
Rs.1,29,600/-
10.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,59,200/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.6,78,200/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The 2 nd respondent-
Insurance Company 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 weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.242 of 2012 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate
Judge,Kanchipuram. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to
transfer the Award amount directly to the Bank account of the
Appellant/Claimant through RTGS, within a period of two weeks. The
claimant is directed to pay necessary Court fee, if any on the enhanced
compensation. However, it is made clear that if there is any delay in filing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the C.M.A. and in case of any earlier order by this Court, depriving interest
for the period of delay in question, the interest portion for that period should
be excluded for the purpose of granting interest. No costs.
04.01.2024
arr
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1. The Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Rais Tower, Plot No.2054, 2nd Avenue,
Anna Nagar,
Chennai- 600 040.
2. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Subordinate Judge,
Kanchipuram.
3.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
arr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
04.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
