Partly allowed

P.Velusamy, v. Chitradevi, W/O.Jeyaraman

Madras HC9 Nov 2017CMA(MD)/1218/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court part-allowed a civil miscellaneous appeal seeking enhancement of motorcycle accident compensation. The court increased future medical expenses and attender charges but denied damage to the two-wheeler.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.8,19,007/- to Rs.9,49,007/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. to be deposited by the insurance company.

P.Velusamy, Vs Chitradevi, W/O.Jeyaraman — Madras HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.11.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

C.M.A.(MD)No.1218 of 2016

¶7

P.Velusamy

¶8

... Appellant/Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Chitradevi

¶11

The Branch Manager, The National Insurance Company Ltd, Pudukkottai Branch,

¶12

T.S.No.4132, Keelaraja Veethi, Pudukkottai District -622 001. ... Respondents/Respondnets

¶13

Prayer : This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2015 made in MCOP.No.589 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Pudukkottai.

¶14

For Appellant : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.A.S.Mathialagan for R2 R1 – Dispensed with.

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The claimant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the award dated 30.04.2015 made in MCOP.No.589 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Pudukkottai.

¶18

2.The claimant was working as a Mason. He has suffered fractures in both legs in the accident that took place on 21.06.2014. The disability was assessed at 55% and it is partial and permanent in nature. The claimant had incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs.3,84,007/- for medical treatment alone. But the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.8,19,007/- as compensation. The Tribunal did not award any sum towards damage to the two wheeler in which he was riding. No damage was awarded under the head attender charges and other conventional heads also. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ compensation awarded to the claimant is not adequate.

¶19

¶20

3.The learned counsel for the claimant would contend that this is a case of functional disability and that therefore multiplier method must be adopted. The claimant was an inpatient for 57 days. Even after getting treatment, he would still need medical assistance. Therefore, I am of the view that towards future medical expenditure, a sum of Rs.55,000/- can be awarded. A sum of Rs.75,000/- can be awarded towards attender charges. Thus, a further sum of Rs.1,30,000/- is awarded. The compensation payable to the claimant is enhanced from Rs.8,19,007/- to Rs.9,49,007/-.

¶21

4.The award dated 30.04.2015 made in MCOP.No.589 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Pudukkottai is modified. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part.

¶22

5.The second respondent insurance company is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.9,49,007/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, less the amount already deposited if any. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire compensation, less the amount already withdrawn by him, if any by filing proper application before the Tribunal.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶25

/True Copy/

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

The Principal District Judge / Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Pudukkottai.

¶29

COPY TO

¶30

The Record Keeper, VR Section,

¶31

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

+1cc to Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian, Advocate Sr.No.87164 +1cc to Mr.A.S.Mathialagan, Advocate Sr.No.86344

¶33

SKM

¶34

VB/SV/MMS/SAR4/23/01/2018/2P/6C

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

C.M.A.(MD)No.1218 of 2016

¶37

09.11.2017

P.Velusamy, v. Chitradevi, W/O.Jeyaraman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Velusamy, v. Chitradevi, W/O.Jeyaraman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Kumar Vs the Chair Person

Royal Sundaram Alliance Vs N.Ganesan

National Insurance Company Vs S. Narayanan

Samuvel Stephen, Vs Suriyagandhi

Royal Sundaram Alliance Vs Murugan

Velmurugan Vs Kannan