SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Mad) 5304

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. MOHAN RAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. PALANIVELU
Dr. M. Hemachand
Versus
I.S. Shaji & Another
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.2210 & 3319 of 2010 & M.P.No.1 of 2010
Decided On : 08-12-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant:V. Mohan Choudary, Advocate.
For the Respondents:S. Vadivel, Advocate.

The court considered the claimant's permanent disability, loss of earning capacity, and future loss of income, and applied the multiplier method to assess the compensation.

Headnote:

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act, Section 170 - Summary: The court considered the claimant's injuries sustained in a motor accident and the resulting loss of earning capacity. It assessed the claimant's future loss of income, the purchase of an artificial limb, medical expenses, and pain and suffering. The court also discussed the application of the multiplier method and the claimant's employment prospects as a Doctor in Naturopathy and Yoga. The court awarded a total sum of Rs.39,42,400 with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of the petition.

Fact of the Case:

The claimant sustained grievous injuries in a motor accident, resulting in the amputation of his left leg. He was terminated from his job as a Doctor due to the injuries and claimed compensation for loss of income and future earning capacity.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the claimant had suffered 85% permanent disability and had lost his employment opportunities as a Doctor due to the amputation. It assessed the claimant's future loss of income, medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and awarded a total sum of Rs.39,42,400 with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of the petition.

Issues: Assessment of compensation for the claimant's injuries, loss of earning capacity, and future loss of income.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the multiplier method to assess the claimant's future loss of income and considered the claimant's employment prospects as a Doctor in Naturopathy and Yoga. It also discussed the purchase of an artificial limb, medical expenses, and pain and suffering.

Final Decision: The court awarded a total sum of Rs.39,42,400 with 7.5% interest per annum from the date of the petition.

Judgment :-

(K. MOHAN RAM, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the award, dated 20.08.2009, passed in MCOP No.315 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (V Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai, the claimant and the insurer have filed CMA Nos.2210 of 2010 and 3319 of 2010, respectively.

2. The case of the claimant is that on 13.10.2006 at about 13.00 hours, when he was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No.PY01-Z-2221 slowly and cautiously in Chengalam Vilakkum Maruthu Road, from south to north, the lorry bearing Registration No.KRO 3958 came rashly and negligently in the said road from opposite direction in the extreme wrong side and hit against the claimants motor cycle and the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The first respondent-S.Shaji is the owner of the vehicle and the National Insurance Company Limited is the insurer of the vehicle and hence both are liable to pay compensation. It is the further case of the claimant that in the accident, his left lower limb was badly damaged with crush injury left leg with compound and comminuted fracture of both bones, crushed foot with amputated big toe and with bone, skin and soft tissue loss with degloving from lower third of thigh and poor distal vascularity resulting in emergency AK amputation of left lower limb done under SAB.

3. According to the claimant, he was working as a Doctor in Mercy Nature Cure Centre, Sengottai, Kottayam District and earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month and Rs.10,000/- per month from private practice. Because of the injuries and amputation of his left leg, he was terminated from service and he could not work as a Doctor. It is the case of the claimant that he is a specialist in Naturopathy medicine and yoga and because of the amputation of his left leg, he cannot treat his patients by teaching them yoga and he cannot do massage and attend to spa.

4. Before the Tribunal, the owner of the vehicle remained exparte. The Insurance Company got permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and filed a counter statement interalia contending as follows:-

The insurer denied all the allegations contained in the petition and put the claimant to prove the age, occupation and income of the claimant and the injuries, treatment and disability suffered by him. The insurer denied that the vehicle was validly insured with them. It was further contended that the accident had occurred solely due to the claimants own negligence. The insurer further contended that the amount of compensation claimed is highly excessive.

5. Before the Tribunal, the claimant was examined as P.W.1 and the Doctor has been examined as P.W.2 and Exs.P-1 to P-26 have been marked. On the side of the respondent, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver and accordingly held that the owner is liable to pay compensation. The Tribunal further held that the vehicle involved in the accident has been insured with the insurer, hence the insurer was also held liable to pay compensation. Though the total claim of the claimant was Rs.75,00,000/-, a sum of Rs.9,20,400/- was awarded as compensation. Being aggrieved by that, both the claimant as well as the insurer are before this Court.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

7. Mr. V.Mohan Choudary, learned counsel for the claimant / appellant in CMA No.2210 of 2010 and for the first respondent in CMA No.3319 of 2010 made the following submissions:-

The Tribunal erred in taking into account the income of the claimant at Rs.14,000/-per month, whose left leg has been amputated above knee, overlooking the fact that the claimant, who was 26 years at the time of accident was a Doctor by profession in Naturopathy and Yoga and the evidence has been adduced by way of Ex.P-17-copy of the Degree Certificate, Ex.P-19-appointment letter issued by Mercy Nature Cur















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top