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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 574

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.M. VELUMANI, J.
S. Manikandan - Appellant
Versus
K. Vengadesh & Another - Respondent
C.M.A. No. 259 of 2021
Decided On : 22-02-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :K. Varadhakamaraj, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Sivakolappan, Advocate.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to enhance compensation based on the nature of injuries, loss of earning power, and relevant legal provisions.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation Enhancement - Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - [MOTOR VEHICLES ACT] - [Section 173] - The court discussed the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and enhanced the amounts for disability, pain and suffering, transportation, extra nourishment, attendant charges, loss of amenities, and loss of earnings based on the nature of injuries, period of treatment, and the appellant's occupation as a driver. The court also referred to the judgment in M. Chinnathambi Vs. S.Deepa and another, which influenced the decision on disability compensation.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant filed for enhancement of compensation granted for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The Tribunal awarded a lower amount, leading to the appeal for higher compensation based on the nature of injuries and loss of earning power.

Finding of the Court:

The court enhanced the compensation for disability, pain and suffering, transportation, extra nourishment, attendant charges, loss of amenities, and loss of earnings, while confirming the amounts for medical expenses and loss of future prospects.

Issues: The main issue was the adequacy of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the appellant's injuries and loss of earning power.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the nature of injuries, period of treatment, and the appellant's occupation as a driver. The court also referred to a previous judgment to determine the disability compensation.

Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was enhanced, with the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company directed to deposit the enhanced amount along with interest and costs.

JUDGMENT :

Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 23.10.2019, made in M.C.O.P. No.4839 of 2015, on the file of the Special Sub Judge No.1, Small Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) Chennai.

1. This appeal has been filed for enhancement of compensation granted by the award dated 23.10.2019, made in M.C.O.P. No.4839 of 2015, on the file of the Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) Chennai.

2. The appellant-claimant, filed M.C.O.P. No.4839 of 2015, on the file of the Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) Chennai, claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident that took place on 08.05.2015.

3. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by driver of the Van belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the 2nd respondent as insurer of the Van to pay a sum of Rs.1,21,950/- as compensation to the appellant.

4. Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal in the award dated 23.10.2019, made in M.C.O.P. No.4839 of 2015, the appellant has come out with the present appeal.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the accident, the appellant suffered grievous injuries and has taken treatment as in-patient at SRM Hospital. The appellant was referred to the Medical Board. The Regional Medical Board at Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, Chennai assessed the appellant and certified that the appellant suffered 5% disability. The Tribunal awarded meagre amount of Rs.15,000/- towards disability at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for 5% disability. Considering the nature of injuries suffered in the accident and the avocation of the appellant as Driver, the Tribunal ought to have fixed 100% loss of earning power and awarded compensation by adopting multiplier method. The appellant was working as a Driver and was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month at the time of accident. The Tribunal awarded only meagre amounts towards pain and suffering, future prospects, loss of income, attendant charges, transportation and extra nourishment. The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of amenities, future medical expenses and prayed for enhancement of the compensation.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent- Insurance Company contended that in the absence of any materials to prove the avocation and income of the appellant, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income and awarded compensation towards loss of income for two months. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are not meagre. The appellant has not made out any case for enhancement of the compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company who appeared through video conference and perused the materials available on record.

8. From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the case of the appellant that in the accident, he suffered blunt injury abdomen, infarct lower pole right kidney and fracture of right 5th and 6th rib in the lateral aspect. He was referred to the Medical Board. The Regional Medical Board at Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital, Chennai assessed the appellant and certified that the appellant suffered 5% disability. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards disability at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for 5% disability, which is meagre. This Court by the judgment reported in 2020 (1) TN MAC 617 [M. Chinnathambi Vs. S.Deepa and another], fixed a sum of Rs.4,000/- per percentage of disability for th

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