Madras High Court

Sathish Kumar vs Joint Director Of Health Services on 15 April, 2025

                                                                                             C.M.A.No.750 of 2025

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                       DATED : 15.04.2025

                                                               CORAM

                                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

                                                     C.M.A.No.750 of 2025
                     Sathish Kumar                                                         ... Appellant
                                                                    vs.
                     1.Joint Director of Health Services,
                       C/o G V K EMRI, Health Visitors Training Institute,
                       Govt. Kasthurbai Gandhi Hospital,
                       Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005
                     2.National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
                       T.P. Cell: No.46, Moore Street,
                       Chennai - 1                                         ... Respondents
                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
                     Vehicles Act, 1988, to allow the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and
                     enhance the award in the order dated 29.02.2024 made in MCOP No.3526
                     of 2017, on the file of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Special Sub
                     Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
                                       For Appellant         : Mr.T.Soundra Sozhan
                                       For R1                : Mr.C.Sathish
                                                               Government Advocate
                                       For R2                : Mr.S.Arunkumar

                                                        JUDGMENT

Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

Court, Chennai in M.C.O.P.No.3526 of 2017, dated 29.02.2024, the

injured/claimant has come before this Court.

2. According to the appellant/claimant, on 17.03.2017, he was

travelling in Ambulance Van bearing Registration No.TN-28-G-0361 as

Emergency Medical Technician from Cuddalore to Virudhachalam. The

vehicle was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and as a

result of the negligent driving, the vehicle dashed against a tree on the left

hand side of the road and capsized. As a result of accident, the claimant

sustained multiple grievous injuries all over the body and admitted in

hospital for taking treatment. As a result of the accident, the claimant lost

his complete vision in left eye and the vision in the right eye was reduced by

60%. Hence, the claim petition was filed seeking compensation of

Rs.1,00,00,000/-.

3. The 1st respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal and the

claim petition was contested only by the insurer of the offending vehicle by

denying the negligence on the part of the driver of the 1st respondent's

ambulance.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

4. Before the Tribunal, the claimant was examined as PW.1 and 27

documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P27 on behalf of the claimant. On

behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined and no document was

marked. The Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Board to the

claimant was marked as Ex.C1.

5. The Tribunal based on the evidence available on record, came to

the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and

negligent driving of ambulance by driver of the 1st respondent. The

compensation payable to the claimant was quantified at Rs.22,39,000/-. Not

satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the injured/claimant has come

before this Court.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as learned

counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company have not

advanced any arguments on the questions of negligence and liability.

Therefore, facts necessary to decide those questions are not discussed in this

judgment.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant would

submit that the Competent Medical Board assessed the disability suffered by

the claimant at 86% and the Tribunal without any reason reduced the

disability at 70%. The learned counsel further submitted that notional

income of Rs.10,500/- fixed by the Tribunal is very meagre one and the

same requires enhancement.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/Insurance

Company would submit that every disability suffered by the injured will not

result in functional disability. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts

and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal fixed functional disability at

70% and the same requires no interference. He also submitted that the

notional income fixed by the Tribunal is fair and reasonable in the facts and

circumstances of the case.

9. The injured/claimant was examined by Competent Medical Board

and Disability Certificate was marked as Ex.C1. A perusal of the Disability

Certificate issued by the Medical Board would suggest that the claimant

suffered disability at 86%. It is also noted that the claimant suffered

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

Neurological, Ophthalmological and Orthopaedic disabilities. Ex.P27-

Disability Certificate issued by Assistant Civil Surgeon, Government Head

Quarters Hospital, Cuddalore, would indicate that due to the accident the

claimant suffered disc pallor in right eye and he suffered optic atrophy in

left eye and his left side vision is completely lost. It is also noted that in his

right eye, he lost the vision to the extent of 60%.

10. A perusal of Discharge Summary-Ex.P6 would indicate that the

claimant suffered fracture injuries in his face, fracture in fibula, fracture in

left distal humerus and compound fracture of proximal left ulna etc. The

details of the multiple fractures suffered by the claimant are mentioned as

follows:-

“(i) Severe Head injury – Bilateral frontal, orbitofrontal and left temporal region, Parenchymal resolving contusion. Minimal inter hemisphere subdural hemorrhage. Mild cerebal edema.

(ii) Facial injury – Fracture in both frontal bones, involving anterior and posterior wall of bilateral frontal sinus.

Fracture in bilateral anterior and posterior wall of maxillary sinus. Fracture in roof, medial wall and floor of orbits bilaterally. Fracture in nasal septum and ethmoid bone. Fracture in medical and lateral pterygoid plates bilaterally.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

Fracture in anterior and medial wall of sphenoid sinus extending to body of sphenoid. Fracture in greater wing of sphenoid squamous part of temporal bone on left side. Fracture in left zygomatic arch.

(iii) Severely Compound comminuted intra articular fracture of left distal femur

(iv) Fracture of posterior and medial malleolus with left distal 1/3rd shaft fibula with ankle subluxation.

(v) Compound Fracture of left distal humerus with intercondylar extension

(vi) Compound Fracture of proximal 1/3rd left ulna

(vii) Admitted with collapse of lung on both sides”

11. Ex.P17, letter issued by employer of the claimant would indicate

that after accident the claimant could not report to his duty for nearly 8

months. Taking into consideration the multiple fracture injuries suffered by

the claimant and the loss of vision in left eye and partial loss of vision in

other eye, this Court feels that the Tribunal was not justified in reducing the

disability fixed by the Competent Medical Board. Therefore, as per Ex.C1-

Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Board, this Court is inclined to

fix the disability suffered by the claimant at 86%.

12. As per Ex.P16-Salary Slip produced by the claimant for the month

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

of February-2017, the claimant received a salary of Rs.12,150/-. Therefore,

the Tribunal was not justified in fixing the notional income at Rs.10,500/-.

The income of the claimant is increased to Rs.12,150/-. As per Ex.P26-

Aadhaar Card of the claimant, his age was fixed at 28 years. Therefore, the

claimant is entitled to 40% enhancement towards future prospects. The

applicable multiplier is 17. Therefore, the amount payable to the claimant

under the head disability is quantified at Rs.29,84,234/- (12,150 x 1.4 x 12 x

17 x 86/100).

13. Taking into consideration the prolonged hospitalisation and

nature of injuries suffered by the claimant, the amount awarded by the

Tribunal under the head pain and sufferings is affirmed. The amount

awarded by the Tribunal under the head transportation charges is increased

to Rs.20,000/-. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head extra

nourishment is increased to Rs.20,000/-. The amount awarded by the

Tribunal under the head loss of amenities is increased to Rs.40,000/-. The

amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head attender charges is

affirmed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

14. In view of the discussions made earlier, the award passed by the

Tribunal is modified as follows:-

Compensation Compensation
Sl.
Description awarded by the awarded by Remarks
No.
Tribunal this Court
1. Disability Rs.20,99,160/- Rs.29,84,234/- Enhanced
2. Pain and Sufferings Rs.60,000/- Rs.60,000/- Confirmed
3. Transportation Rs.8,000/- Rs.20,000/- Enhanced
4. Extra Nourishment Rs.15,000/- Rs.20,000/- Enhanced
5. Attender Charges Rs.26,400/- Rs.26,400/- Confirmed
6. Loss of Amenities Rs.30,000/- Rs.40,000/- Enhanced
Rs.22,38,560/-
Enhanced by
Total Compensation rounded off to Rs.31,50,634/-
Rs.9,11,634/-
Rs.22,39,000/-

15. Accordingly, the award passed by the Tribunal is increased to

Rs.31,50,634/- from Rs.22,39,000/-. The 2nd Respondent/Insurance

Company is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount of

Rs.31,50,634/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the

date of claim petition to the date of realisation, to the credit of

M.C.O.P.No.3526 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal/Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai, within a

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. On

such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount by

making formal application before the Tribunal.

16. With the above direction, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly

allowed. No costs.


                                                                                                   15.04.2025
                     Index                    :Yes/No
                     Speaking order           :Yes/No
                     Neutral Citation         :Yes/No
                     dm

                     To

1.The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

2.Joint Director of Health Services, C/o G V K EMRI, Health Visitors Training Institute, Govt. Kasthurbai Gandhi Hospital, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005

3.National Insurance Co. Ltd., T.P. Cell: No.46, Moore Street, Chennai - 1

4.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

15.04.2025

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/05/2025 04:20:54 pm )