IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI M. Nagaraju ...Appellant Vs.

1. Padma Sekhar

2. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, No. 61, Vellore Road, Dharapadavedu, Katpadi Post, Vellore District – 632 007. ...Respondents Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and judgment dated 17.07.2025 passed in M.C.O.P.No.356 of 2022 on the file of the MACT, Additional Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri.

For Appellant : Mr. S. Udhayakumar.

For Respondents : Mr. J. Chandran for R2.

R1- Notice Dispensed with.

JUDGMENT

This Appeal has been filed against the decree and judgment passed in M.C.O.P.No.356 of 2022 on the file of the MACT, Additional Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri dated 17.07.2025.

2. The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.356 of 2022 on the file of the MACT, Additional Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri. He filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking a compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident that took place on 23.02.2022.

3. Briefly stated, on 23.02.2022 at about 10:00 p.m., the petitioner on his two wheeler bearing Reg.No. AP-03-BL-3957 was driving in a careful manner on the Kuppam-Krishnagiri Road near the vegetable market, following the traffic rules and honking his horn, when a Multi Axle Trailler Lorry bearing Reg.No. TN-23-CC-4685, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner without following traffic rules, came from the Tirupattur-Kuppam Road tried to overtake without honking his horn and caused the accident. The petitioner sustained grievous injuries from the accident and was taken to PES Medical College Hospital, Kuppam. The FIR was registered against the driver of the lorry.

3.1. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of the 1^st respondent/ driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No. TN-23-CC-4685 was the cause of the accident and since the said vehicle was insured with the 2^nd respondent, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

4. The claim petition was resisted by the 2^nd respondent/ Insurance Company.

5. The Tribunal, after analyzing the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the accident took place as alleged and that the claimant was entitled for compensation from the respondents. Compensation of Rs.4,30,396/-

has been awarded carrying interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant filed this present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

7. Mr. S. Udhayakumar, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal having found that the appellant sustained pelvic fracture with futures of communited displaced fracture of left superior pubic rammus, minimally displaced fracture of left inferior Ramus, Subluxation-Dislocation of public symphyss communited displaced fracture of right lieum with free fluid in paracolic gutter, Minimal displaced fracture involving Antero Lateral aspect of the left 8-1 Orbis and suffered 40% disability as per Ex.A10 disability certificate, failed to note that due to fractures, the appellant was not able to carry out work like before and awarded only Rs.2,80,000/- for disability. The claimant incurred more than Rs.3,00,000/- towards medical expenses alone. The claimant was only aged about 38 years old and was working in Shahi Exports Pvt. Ltd., at the time of the accident. He would further submit that the awarded amount under the various heads of pain and suffering, loss of amenities, extra nourishment, attender charges, loss of income and transportation were very meager.

8.In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for the appellant notice to the 1^st respondent is dispensed with.

9. On the side of the 2^nd respondent/Insurance Company it is submitted that, the learned Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case has awarded