JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.48 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Perambalur.)

1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2016 passed in MCOP No.48 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Perambalur, questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the said Tribunal.

2. The parties herein are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

3. The claimant filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the injuries sustained by her in a road traffic accident that occurred on 11.10.2024.

4. The Tribunal, upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence passed an award for a sum of Rs.9,93,158/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition, fastening liability on the Insurance Company. Though on behalf of respondents, counsels entered appearance, no argument was advance on behalf of them.

5. Mr. S. Arun Kumar learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the claimant suffered crush injuries over her left chest, left forearm and left wrist as per medical records.

6. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the disability assessment made by Dr. Selavaraj (P.W7) is on the higher side. The income of the claimant was fixed at Rs.6,000/- and 1/3rd of amount was deducted for personal expenses from the monthly income and loss of earning capacity calculated is totally incorrect.

7. The following MCOPs arise out of the same accident. For MCOP Nos.46,48,49,56,57 and 59 of 2015, common evidences was recorded and common judgments was passed.

8. At trial, the claimant Rama was examined as P.W2. Ex.P3 to Ex.P.6 and Ex.P18 to Ex.P20 were marked. On the side of the appellant/Insurance Company, no witnesses was examined.

9. It has come on record that on 11.10.2014 at about 9:45 a.m, while the claimant along with the claimants in other MCOPs were traveling in a tata city car bearing registration No. TN 49 AT 5529 from Sivankoil to Aranthagi, at a point near Kulakudikulam, Thiruchittrambalam, the driver of the said vehicle drove in a rash and negligent manner and the vehicle while turning, the van turned topsy turvy. Therefore, all the claimants' sustained injuries, is not in dispute.

10. It can be seen from the discharge summary (Ex.P4) issued by Kauvery Hospital, Trichy, that the claimant was admitted at Kauvery Hospital on 11.10.2014 and on account of the accident, she suffered the following injuries :

(i) Crush injuriy left shoulder with muscle exposed

(ii) Fracture Scapula Left

(iii) Open fracture lateral 3rd clavical left side

(iv) Deep laceration over left arm and forearm

It could be seen from the discharge summary (Ex.P4), that the claimant had undergone surgeries in respect of left shoulder and arm on 13.10.2014, 24.10.2014 and 30.10.2014.

11. It is the evidence of Dr.Selvaraj (P.W7) that due to the said fractures and injuries, the claimant cannot lift her left hand and she cannot do her normal work. The claimant's disability is fixed as 70%. The trial Court has concluded that it is not possible for the claimant to lead a normal life due to the injuries suffered and chose to adopt the multiplier method. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in Rajkumar vs. Ajay Kumar and Another, (2011) 1 SCC 343, has given certain guidelines for assessing the loss of future earning capacity

"19.(i) All injuries (or permanent disabilities arising from injuries),do not result in loss of earning capacity.

(ii) The percentage of permanent disability with reference to the whole body of a person, cannot be assumed to be the percentage of loss of earni