The High Court dismissed the insurance company's appeal against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.9,75,400/- to a 20-year-old claimant, upholding the assessment of disability and loss of future earning capacity based on his athletic records.
Appellant directed to deposit balance compensation to the Tribunal within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.11.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
C.M.A.No.1564 of 2014
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited College Road Nungambakkam Chennai-6 .. Appellant/2nd Respondent -Vs1. G.Meganath Prassna .. Respondent/Petitioner 2. M.Sasi Kumar .. Respondent/1st respondent Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 30.8.2013 made in M.C.O.P.No.4094 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, VI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellant :: Mr.S.Manohar For Respondents :: Mr.C.Munusamy for R1 No appearance for R2 JUDGMENT
This civil miscellaneous appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.4094 of 2008 dated 30.8.2013, in and by which the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VI Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai has awarded a compensation of Rs.9,75,400/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of numbering of the petition viz., 21.11.2008 till the date of deposit within two months from the date of the award for Rs.9,50,400/- and with no interest for future medical expenses of Rs.25,000/- payable by the appellantInsurance company on behalf of the second respondent, the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident, to the first respondent-claimant.
First Main Road, a car bearing Registration No.TN 07 AU 2047 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him, as a result, he sustained multiple and grievous injuries and that the driver of the car was responsible for the accident. It was also further claimed that since the second respondent being the owner of the vehicle and the appellant being the insurer, they are jointly and vicariously liable to pay the compensation to the first respondent with costs and interest from the date of accident till the date of realisation for the grievous and multiple injuries sustained in his left leg causing fracture in both bones and also multiple injuries all over the body.
“,lJ bjhil vYk;g[ Kwpt[ Vw;gl;L TLtjw;F e Pz ;l fk;gpfs; bghWj;jg;gl;L tphpe;J Toa[s;sJ/ jir ,Wf;fj;jhy; mir jpwd; 30 ofphp Fiwe;Js;sJ/ elg;gjhYk; epd;W ntiy bra;tJk; rpukk;/ tpisahl;L nghl;ofspy; fye;J bfhs;sKoahJ/ bghUj;jg;gl;Ls;s fk;gp cs;ns cs;sd/ mof;fo fhy;fspy; t Pf ;fKk; typa[k; Vw;gLfpwJ/”
After assessing the disability at 50%, the doctor has also issued the disability certificate, Ex.P8. However, the Tribunal, considering the age and the injuries sustained by the claimant, fixed the disability at 35% and awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/- under the head partial and permanent disability at the rate of Rs.2000/- per percentage of disability. Therefore, this Court is not able to see any infirmity in the finding of the Tribunal on this aspect.
Ex.P4 series, namely, the copies of 42 sports certificates issued by various sports associations, has rightly come to the conclusion that but for the accident, the claimant would have gone for a good job and would have been fetching a decent salary and accordingly fixed his purported monthly income at Rs.9,000/-. As the claimant sustained fracture on his left leg and plates have been implanted and considering his age and adopting the multiplier of 18, the Tribunal arrived at a sum of Rs.6,80,400/- under the head of loss of earning capacity, namely, Rs.9000x12x18x35/100 = Rs.6,80,400/-. Taking into account that the claimant was aged about 20 years at the time of accident being unmarried and also as evidenced by the 20 sports certificates issued by various sports associations that he took part in various games activities, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the claimant would lose some benefits in life due to the accident and accordingly awarded a sum of Rs.75,000/under the head loss of amenities. Finally, the Tribunal has fixed the total compensation as follows:-
Out of the said sum, barring the sum of Rs.25,000/- towards future medical expenses, it has awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum for the amount of Rs.9,50,400/- from the date of petition till the date of realisation payable by the appellant. Therefore the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant on the quantum of compensation are far from acceptance.
Accidents Claims Tribunal, VI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the first respondent/claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount on a proper application made before the Tribunal. Consequently, interim order stands vacated and the M.P.Nos.1 of 2014 & 1 of 2015 are also dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ss
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(VI Judge)
Court of Small Causes
Chennai
+1 cc to Mr.S.Manohar, Advocate, sr.62817
+1 cc to Mr.C.Munusamy, Advocate, sr.62684
C.M.A.No.1564 of 2014
scd co
kra 02.02.2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal erred in assessing compensation at Rs.9,75,400/- for a young sportsman disabled in a motor accident.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited
G.Meganath Prassna
M.Sasi Kumar
T.RAJA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
