Madras High Court
Muthu vs Karunanithi on 28 October, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R.Hemalatha
CMA.No.109 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.109 of 2023
Muthu ... Appellant
vs.
1. Karunanithi
2. The Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.2, Dr.Sankaran Road, Namakkal. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 11.10.2022 in
M.C.O.P.991/2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court, Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mr.T.S.Arthanareeswaran
For R2 : Mr.D.Bhaskaran
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P.991/2017 on the file
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Namakkal. He filed the claim
petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking
compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
accident that happened on 07.07.2017.
2. The brief case of the appellant / claimant is as follows :
On 07.07.2017, the claimant was riding a two wheeler bearing
Registration number TN 34 X 0208 on Thiruchengode - Valaraigate
Kokkarayanpet main road. When he was nearing Shakthi Murugan
Marriage hall, Kollapatti, a speeding tanker lorry bearing Registration
number TN 33 AC 8626 hit the two wheeler, as a result of which, the
claimant fell down and sustained injuries all over his body. He was
immediately rushed to the Government hospital, Thiruchengode.
3. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the tanker lorry bearing Registration number TN 33 AC 8626
was the cause of the accident and that since the said vehicle was insured
with the second respondent, the United India Insurance Company
Limited, the owner and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay
compensation to him.
4. In the Tribunal, the owner of the vehicle remained absent and
was set exparte. The second respondent resisted the claim petition on all
the grounds available to the insurer under Section 170 of the Motor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Vehicles Act.
5. The Tribunal after analysing the evidence on record, fastened
negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry and the claimant in the
ratio 90:10 as the claimant did not have a valid driving licence on the date
of accident and awarded compensation of Rs.1,27,074/- (90% of total
compensation of Rs.1,41,193/-) together with interest at the rate of 7.5%
per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation and fastening
10% of contributory negligence on the part of the claimant, the appellant /
claimant has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act.
7. Heard Mr.T.S.Arthanareswaran, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant and Mr.D.Bhaskaran, learned counsel for the second
respondent.
8. Negligence:
It is seen from the records that the accident took place on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Thiruchengode - Valaraigate Kokkarayanpet main road. The claimant
examined himself to prove the manner of accident. His evidence was that
the driver of the lorry was rash and negligent in driving his vehicle. FIR
(Ex.P1) was registered against the driver of the lorry. There is nothing on
record to show that the claimant also contributed to the accident. In the
circumstances, fastening 10% of contributory negligence on the part of
the claimant by the Tribunal is erroneous and the same is hereby set aside.
9. Quantum:
10. A perusal of the medical records shows that the claimant
sustained a fracture on his left wrist. The Medical Board attached to the
Government Hospital, Namakkal assessed the disability of the claimant as
15%. According to the claimant, he was working as a cook in a hotel,
earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month. However, no acceptable
evidence was adduced by the claimant to substantiate his contention that
he was earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month. Hence, a sum of
Rs.10,000/- is fixed as notional monthly income of the deceased. On
account of the injuries, the claimant would have been out of action atleast
for three months and therefore a sum of Rs.30,000/- (10,000 X 3) is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
awarded towards loss of income. A perusal of the disability certificate
shows that the claimant has not sustained any functional disability
warranting this Court to adopt multiplier method. In the circumstances, a
sum of Rs.7,000/- is fixed per percentage of partial permanent disability
and thus a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- (15 x 7000) is awarded towards
disability. The following tabular column would show the award passed by
the Tribunal and the modified award passed by this Court:
S. Heads Amount awarded by the Award of
No. Tribunal this Court
1 Partial Permanent Rs.75,000/- Rs.1,05,000/-
Disability (15X5,000) (15X7,000)
2 For Loss of income for Rs.2,500/- Rs.30,000/-
three months (10,000 X 3)
3 Medical expenditure Rs.31,193/- Rs.31,193/-
4 Pain and sufferings Rs.20,000/- Rs.20,000/-
5 Attender charges Rs.2,500/- Rs.2,500/-
6 Extra nourishment Rs.5,000/- Rs.10,000/-
7 For Transport expenses Rs.5,000/- Rs.5,000/-
8 Total Rs.1,41,193/- Rs.2,03,693/-
(less 10% contributory
negligence)
Rs.1,27,074/-
10. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
enhanced to Rs.2,03,693/- that would carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum.
11. In the result,
i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
ii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.2,03,693/-.
iii. 10% Contributory negligence fastened on the part of claimant, is set
aside.
iv. The appellant / claimant is directed to pay court fee for the
enhanced compensation amount, if any, within a period of four
weeks from the date of this order and the Registry is directed to
draft the decree only after receipt of the Court fee.
v. The liability of the first respondent (owner) and the second
respondent (the United India Insurance Company Limited) is joint
and several and the second respondent, the United India Insurance
Company Limited is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount
i.e. Rs.2,03,693/- (less the amount already deposited) together with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petition till the date of deposit within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order / uploading of this order
to the credit of M.C.O.P.991/2017 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Namakkal.
vi. On such deposit being made the appellant, claimant is permitted to
withdraw the same with accrued interest and costs, after following
due process of law.
28.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
vum
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court, Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
vum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
28.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
