The High Court allowed this appeal as partially entertained, enhancing the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for permanent disability and loss of future earning capacity from Rs. 1,44,000 to Rs. 4,91,000.
Compensation enhanced to Rs. 4,91,000 with respondents directed to deposit amount within six 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
Judgment Reserved on : 03.02.2017 Judgment Pronounced on: 15.09.2017
CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
C.M.A.No.1263 of 2008
K.Palani
...Appellant/Petitioner Vs
Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the fair and decreetal order dated 19.10.2007 made in M.C.O.P.No.4625 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track Court No.III), Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.Ramya V.Rao for Mr.A.N.Viswanatharao R1 : No Appearance For R2 : Mr.C.Paranthaman JUDGMENT
On 07-03-2002, a cyclist was hit by an ambassador car belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent leading to the former suffering injuries. The injured cyclist then moved the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- whereas, the Tribunal has passed an award for Rs.1,44,000/- payable with interest at 7.5% per annum. He was a mason by avocation and was aged 42 years at the relevant time. He suffered fracture of right elbow, right humorous bone and also crush injuries having a dimension of 10 X 7 cms., about his right elbow. Ext.P-3 photograph shows the nature of injury that a lay man may appreciate. P.W-2, the doctor, however, has looked into the medical aspect of the injury and has determined percentage of disability that the claimant had suffered at 85%. The Tribunal, even though has entered a finding that the nature of injury that the claimant/appellant has suffered was such that he might not be able to engage in the same avocation, yet
reduced the percentage of his permanent disability to 50%. Then it proceeded to pass the award on various heads as tabulated below:-
| Heads | Award Amount (Rs.) |
|---|---|
| Medical Expenses | 2,000.00 |
| Loss of income | 18,000.00 |
| Nutrition | 2,000.00 |
| Transportation | 2,000.00 |
| Pain and Suffering | 25,000.00 |
| Mental agony | 10,000.00 |
| Permanent disability 50% | 85,000.00 |
| Total | 1,44,000.00 |
While granting its award on the head of permanent disability the Tribunal has not explained how it arrived at Rs.85,000/- as compensation.
future earning capacity is (Rs.2500 x 12 x 14 x 85%) Rs. 3,57,000/-. He was in the hospital for close to three months and necessarily the compensation payable for pain and suffering requires to be enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/-. As regards compensation on other heads that which has been awarded by the Tribunal is retained. The award amount is accordingly reworked as shown below:
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Medical Expenses 2,000
Loss of income 18,000
Nutrition 2,000
Transportation 2,000
Pain and Suffering 1,00,000
Mental agony 10,000
Loss of future earning capacity 3,57,000
Total 4,91,000
5. In the result, this appeal is partially allowed and the
compensation awarded is enhanced from Rs. 1,44,000/- to
Rs.4,91,000/-. The respondents are directed to deposit the
enhanced amount with interest at 7.5% per annum and the same is
directed to be deposited within six weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order, whereupon the claimant would be
entitled to withdraw the same forthwith. The claimant is
directed to pay necessary court fee for the enhanced portion of
compensation. No costs.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
ds
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Fast Track Court No.III,
Chennai.
C.M.A.No.1263 of 2008
BR(CO)
SP(20/02/2018)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal correctly assessed compensation for permanent disability by applying functional disability principles to a mason unable to work at age 42?
Whether the compensation head for pain and suffering and loss of future earning capacity required enhancement based on the nature of the injury?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajesh Kumar Vs Ajay Kumar and anotherApplied¶17
Rajesh Kumar Vs Ajay Kumar and another [(2011) ACJ 1]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Palani
A.K.A.Transport
The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
N. Seshasayee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
N. Seshasayee
Parties & counsel
