D.Bright Gilbert (Died) vs Joseph John Kennedy
2024 Latest Caselaw 18288 Mad

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18288 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 September, 2024

Madras High Court

D.Bright Gilbert (Died) vs Joseph John Kennedy on 13 September, 2024

                                                                      C.M.A.(MD) No.1125 of 2016

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                 DATED : 13.09.2024

                                                      CORAM

                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                         C.M.A.(MD) No.1125 of 2016



                    1.D.Bright Gilbert (died),
                    2.Caroline Janaki,
                    3.Benitta,
                    4.Gnana Amirtham.                                        ... Appellants

                                                        Vs.

                    1.Joseph John Kennedy,
                    2.The Managing Director,
                    Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
                    Division-III,
                    Ranithottam,
                    Nagercoil,
                    Agasteeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari.                        ... Respondents

                    (A2 to A4 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased
                    sole appellant vide order dated 29.04.2021
                    in C.M.P.(MD)No.4229 to 4231 of 2021)
                    Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                    Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 22.01.2014
                    passed in M.C.O.P.No.78 of 2011on the file of the Motor Accidents
                    Claims Tribunal/ Special Court for Forest Offences Cases, Nagercoil,
                    Kanyakumari.



                    _____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                    Page No. 1 of 6
                                                                       C.M.A.(MD) No.1125 of 2016

                                    For Appellant           : Mrs.A.Elis Chitra Devi

                                    For Respondents         : Mr.P.Prabhakaran for R2


                                                      JUDGMENT

The instant appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the

compensation.

2. Since the finding on negligence and the manner of the accident

are not under challenge, the facts leading to the filing of the claim petition

are unnecessary for the disposal of the instant appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that

the claimant/first appellant, who died pending disposal of the appeal, had

suffered serious injuries, and due to the injuries, there was a shortening of

his left leg by 3 cm and he was unable to walk and climb the steps and

that the compensation awarded under the head attendant charges and the

other heads is meagre and hence, prayed for enhancement.

4. The learned counsel for the second respondent/Transport

Corportaion, per contra, submitted that the compensation awarded by the

_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Tribunal is more than reasonable and therefore, no interference is called

for.

5. The only point for consideration in the instant appeal is ‘whether

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?’

6. It is seen from the records that the Doctor had assessed the

disability at 20% as per Ex.P12. Considering the facts and circumstances

of the case and the year of the accident, this Court is of the view that a

sum of Rs.3,000/- can be awarded per percentage of the disability and

hence, the compensation under the head ‘Disability’ can be enhanced to

Rs.60,000/-.

7. Admittedly, the claimant/first appellant was taking treatment as

an inpatient in two spells as per the evidence of the Doctor-P.W.2 and the

discharge summary was marked as Ex.P6. Therefore, the attendant

charges at Rs.1650/- awarded by the Tribunal is meagre and the same can

be enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The compensation awarded under the other

heads is just and reasonable. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal

is enhanced as follows:

_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sl. Description Amount Amount Award No awarded by the awarded by this confirmed, Tribunal Court enhanced or granted 1 For gravies injury Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- Confirmed 2 Damages of Cloths & Rs. 1,000/- Rs. 1,000/- Confirmed Watch 3 Pain and sufferings Rs. 25,000/- Rs. 25,000/- Confirmed 4 Extra nourishment Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- Confirmed 5 Transportation charges Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- Confirmed 6 Medical expenditure Rs.1,05,496.44/- Rs.1,05,496.44/- Confirmed 7 Loss of income for 11 Rs. 2,365/- Rs. 2,365/- Confirmed days 8 Loss of income for 5 Rs. 32,500/- Rs. 32,500/- Confirmed months 9 Future treatment Rs. 25,000/- Rs. 25,000/- Confirmed 10 Attendant charges Rs. 1,650/- Rs. 10,000/- Enhanced 11 Disability Rs. 40,000/- Rs. 60,000/- Enhanced Total Rs.2,58,011.44/- Rs.2,86,361.44/- Enhanced by Rs.28,350/-

8. The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit

the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.2,86,361.44/- (Rupees Two

Lakhs Eighty Six Thousand Three Hundred Sixty one and forty four paise

only) together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of

the claim petition till the date of realization (excluding the period of

dismissal for default if any) and costs, less the amount already deposited,

_____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

if any, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order.

9. The appellants 2 to 4 who are the legal heirs of the first appellant

are permitted to withdraw the compensation, equally, less the amount

already withdrawn, if any, by filing an appropriate application before the