Madras High Court
S.Tamilselvi vs K.Sakthivel on 1 April, 2025
CMA.No.978 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated :01.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
CMA No.978 of 2025
S.Tamilselvi ... Appellant
Vs.
1. K.Sakthivel
2.The New India Assurance Company Limted
No. 92, East Coast Chambers,
GN Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 17. ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicle Act, to enhance the amount awarded in MCOP No. 80 of 2021
dated 22.11.2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. II
(Special Subordinate Court for MCOP Cases), Tiruvallur.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Sivakumar
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, the injured claimant has come before this court.
2.It is the case of the appellant/ claimant that she suffered injury in a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
road accident that had taken place on 13.04.2016. It is stated in the claim
petition that she was walking along with the bicycle carrying her minor
relative child on that day proceeding from Manavalanagar to
Poonamallee. When she came near Nagathamman temple in Poonamallee
High road, the Ford Fiesta car belonged to the first respondent insured
with the second respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and
dashed against the claimant. As a result of the accident, the claimant
suffered injury in her right femur and left hand. She was treated as an
inpatient in MIOT hospital for 17 days (13.04.2016 to 23.04.2016 and
23.06.2019 to 28.06.2019). Even after discharge, she took physiotherapy
for 6 months. Therefore, the claim petition was filed seeking
compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-
3. The first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal and
the claim was contested by the second respondent/ insurance company on
the ground that the accident did not occur due to the negligence on the
part of the driver of the car. The age, income and nature of the injury
pleaded in the claim petition were disputed in the counter.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
4. The Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence available on record,
came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash
and negligent driving of the car insured with the second respondent/
insurance company. The compensation payable to the claimant was
quantified at Rs.4,54,130/- Not satisfied with the quantum of
compensation, the claimant has come before this court.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant/injured claimant submitted
that the amount of Rs.15,000/- each awarded by the Tribunal under the
heads pain and suffering and the loss of amenities are very much on lower
side and hence, it requires enhancement.
6. The Medical Board which examined the claimant issued
disability certificate fixing disability at 40%. The Tribunal granted Rs.
5,000/- per percentage of the disability and hence, the amount under the
head loss of disability was fixed at Rs.2,00,000/-. Taking into
consideration the year of accident, the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal per percentage of the disability is fair and reasonable and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
said finding is confirmed. The Tribunal liberally awarded Rs.50,000/-
under the head transportation charges and Rs.70,000/- under the head loss
of income during treatment period.
7. In the petition, it was stated that she was working as an
Operating Engineer in a company at the time of accident. She also
produced Exhibit P9, pay slip to prove that she had drawn Rs.20,982/- as
salary for the month of March 2016. However, the claimant has not
produced any document to show that during treatment period she applied
for leave on loss of pay. In these circumstances, the amount awarded by
the Tribunal under the head loss of income during the treatment period is
not sustainable. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head
transportation charges is also on higher side. Taking into consideration all
these factors, this Court feels that even if the amount awarded by the
Tribunal under the heads pain and suffering and loss of amenities requires
enhancement, the total amount awarded by the Tribunal need not be
disturbed. Accordingly, the claimant has not made out any case to interfere
with the award for enhancement of the compensation Accordingly, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
01.04.2025
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
nr
To
1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Special Subordinate Court for MCOP Cases
Tiruvallur.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
nr
01.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 12:31:56 pm )
