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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3312

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R. SWAMINATHAN, R. POORNIMA, JJ.
Nazeer Basha (Rep. By his wife/Guardian Sithy Shinosa Banu) – Appellant
Versus
R. Elavarasan and Anr. – Respondents
C.M.A.(MD) Nos.176 & 822 of 2022
Decided On : 26-02-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. K. Govindarajan for Mr. S. Alagusundar, Mr. S. Royce Immanuel, Mr. I. Robert Chandrakumar.

The court emphasized that compensation for personal injuries must reflect the severity of the injuries and the claimant's permanent disability, modifying the award to ensure just compensation.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 166 and 173 - Claim for compensation due to motor accident - The claimant sustained severe injuries resulting in total and permanent disability due to the negligent driving of the first respondent's vehicle - The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.33,20,200/- which was contested by both parties - The court found that the compensation awarded was inadequate considering the claimant's condition and future medical needs. (Paras 5, 26)

(B) Negligence - The court held that the driver of the first respondent was solely responsible for the accident, dismissing claims of contributory negligence by the claimant. (Paras 24, 25)

Facts of the case:
The claimant was severely injured in an accident caused by the negligent driving of the first respondent's vehicle, resulting in significant medical expenses and permanent disability. The claimant sought compensation for medical expenses, pain, and suffering, among other losses. (Paras 1, 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The court modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.56,97,382/- considering the severity of the injuries and the claimant's ongoing medical needs. (Paras 26, 28)

Issues: The main issues were whether the compensation awarded was adequate and whether the claimant was entitled to enhanced compensation. (Paras 10, 11)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for just compensation reflecting the claimant's severe and permanent disability, and the inadequacy of the original award in light of the evidence presented. (Paras 22, 26)

Result: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.(MD)No.176 of 2022 is allowed, and the award is enhanced to Rs.56,97,382/- with interest, while C.M.A.(MD)No.822 of 2022 is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(R. POORNIMA, J.)

The appellant/ Insurance Company has filed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A(MD)No.822 of 2022 and the claimant has filed C.M.A.(MD)No.176 of 2022 against the fair order and decretal order dated 29.01.2021 passed in M.C.O.P.No.491 of 2017 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The brief facts of the petition filed by the claimant before the Tribunal is as follows:

(i) On 25.02.2017 at about 900 p.m., the petitioner was standing in the centre median of the road, opposite to Lakshmipuram Bus stop in Trichy – Thanjavur Main Road, at that time, the first respondent's Mahindra TUV – 300 bearing Registration No.TN-49-BH-6936 was proceeding in the above said road from West to the East, which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with hectic and uncontrollable speed without blowing horn and without watching the petitioner, dashed on the petitioner thereby caused the accident. Due to the accident, the petitioner was thrown away and sustained severe head injury, fracture in the right frontal bone with diffuse cerebral oedema, minimal right frontal lobe haemorrhagic contusion significant bifrontal lobe contusion, minimal right frontal lobe SAH, minimal hemispheric, fissure SDH, and severe injury caused in backside head, large lacerated wound over forehead, abrasion over left forearm and both legs and sustained multiple grievous injuries all over the body.

(ii) After the accident, the petitioner was admitted at Retna Global Hospital, Trichy as in patient from 25.02.2017 to 12.4.2017 and now he is taking continuous treatment as outpatient. Nurses are giving physiotherapy treatment and further treatment at home of the petitioner. The petitioner spent more than Rs.8,00,000 towards medical expenses. So far, he has to incur a huge amount for medical expenses.

(iii) The accident occurred purely due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent's Mahendra TUV 300 bearing Registration No.TN 49 BH 6936 against whom a case has been registered by the Traffic Investigation Wing Police Station in Crime No.50/2017, for the offence under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC.

(iv) In the above accident, the petitioner has sustained total and permanent disability. Due to the severe head injury, fracture in right frontal bone with diffuse cerebral oedema and minimal right frontal lobe haemorrhagic contusion significant bifrontal lobe contusion, minimal right frontal lobe SAH, minimal hemispheric, fissure SDH, and severe injury caused in backside head, the petitioner has a severe headache, giddiness and vomiting often. He lost his memory power and having intermittent head pain and is also unable to concentrate on avocation as before and still he is bedridden. On account of the large lacerated wound over the forehead, sutures were performed. Due to this, the petitioner's face becomes totally deformed. Due to the abrasion over the left forearm and both legs, the petitioner's left hand lost its grasping power and the petitioner is not able to lift and carry any weight and climb on steps and unable to ride any two wheeler vehicle. During the treatment taken in the above-mentioned Retna Global Hospital, Trichy, the duty Doctor made a hole in the throat of the petitioner by surgery on 28.02.2017 and insert a tube in the throat, thereby breathing is happened to the petitioner. Now the movement of the petitioner's head is totally restricted. Due to the severe head injury, multiple injuries were caused all over the body, the petitioner has not yet regained his consciousness. Even though he is taking treatment as per the advice of the doctor, the possibility of complete recovery is in question, the petitioner is totally and permanently disabled.

(v) The petitioner further stated that due to accidental injuries and severe head injury, the petitioner could not move from the bed from the date of the accident till date. Moreover, urine and motion were passed by the pe

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