Partly allowed

Ganesan, v. Muthukanagarajan

Madras HC7 Nov 2017CMA(MD)/1225/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award of compensation for a claimant who suffered a below-knee amputation. The court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.11,71,200/-, including additional amounts for pain and sufferings and future medical expenses, and directed the insurance company to deposit the sum with interest.

What did the court decide?

The insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.11,71,200/- with interest at 7.5% per annum within twelve weeks.

Ganesan, Vs Muthukanagarajan — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 07.11.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

C.M.A.(MD)No.1225 of 2015

Ganesan

... Appellant

Vs.

1.Muthukanagarajan 2.The Branch Manager, National Insurance Companay Ltd., T.S.No.4132, East Main Street, Pudukottai and District. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V.Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.245 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai.

¶12

For Appellant : Mr.N.Balakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.D.Sivaraman for R2

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶15

2.The injured claimant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation. In the accident in question, he suffered amputation on his right leg below knee. The Tribunal has adopted multiplier method by proceeding on the footing that there has been functional disability. Percentage of disability has been computed at 80%. The learned counsel for the insurance company would point out that as per Schedule of Employees Compensation Act, such a disability is assessed only at 50%. However considering the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant, the compensation can be enhanced. The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and sufferings. This can be enhanced by Rs.1,50,000/-. For future medical expenses, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- can be given. Therefore, the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is enhanced by a further sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. In other heads, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ confirmed. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.11,71,200/- as compensation.

¶16

¶17

3.The second respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation of Rs.11,71,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and costs, from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of twelve 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 entitled to withdraw the said sum, less the amount already withdrawn by him, if any, by filing proper application before the Tribunal.

¶18

4.This civil miscellaneous appeal stands partly allowed. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

Arul To

¶23

1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ Pudukottai.

¶24

2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶25

+1CC to Mr.D.Sivaraman, Advocate Sr.No.85891

¶26

+1CC to Mr.No.Balakrishan, Advocate Sr.No.34145

¶27

GJM/KK/SAR-3-19.12.2017-2p-5c

¶28

C.M.A.(MD)No.1225 of 2015 07.11.2017

¶29

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

Ganesan, v. Muthukanagarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesan, v. Muthukanagarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Merline Selva Sundari Vs J. Jeyakanthan Thangaiah

Selvi @ Ponnimani Selvi Vs the Managing Director

The United India Insurance Vs Gomathi

P.Silambayee (Unsound) Vs a.Shagayajuli

N.Janaki, Vs the Tahsildar

Iffco Tokyo General Insurance Vs Sri Rengan