Partly allowed

The Divisional Manager v. R.Sivakumar

Madras HC11 Dec 2023CMA/1641/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court allowed a civil appeal by an insurance company against an award in a motor accident case. The court reduced the functional disability percentage and added compensation for loss of amenities, revising the total award to Rs. 7,55,250/-.

What did the court decide?

Award modified to Rs. 7,55,250/- including Rs. 25,000 for loss of amenities; appellant directed to pay reduced amount with interest.

The Divisional Manager Vs R.Sivakumar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 11.12.2023

¶4

CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022 and CMP.No.12247 of 2022

¶6

The Divisional Manager National Insurance Company Limited D.O.No.110, J.N.Street Puducherry - 605 001. ..... Appellants / 2^nd Respondent

¶7

¶8

1.R.Sivakumar ..... 1^st Respondent / Petitioner 2.R.Senthilkumar ..... 2^nd Respondent / 1^st Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 praying to set aside the award that has been passed in this matter by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate) at Cuddalore, in MCOP.No.1963 of 2018, dated 27-09-2021, allow the appeal.

¶10

For Appellant : Ms.R.Sree Vidhya For Respondents : Ms.Ramya V.Rao for R1 R2 - No appearance

¶11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6

¶12

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

This appeal is preferred by the Insurance company challenging the award passed by the Tribunal in MCOP.No.1963 of 2018, on the ground that the compensation awarded is unrealistically high.

¶15

On 10.01.2018, the first respondent, an auto rickshaw driver suffered serious injuries to his right leg, when he was hit by another auto rickshaw, while he was standing on the road margin. He suffered fractures to his both right tibia and right fibula, besides other fractures to his heel area. The medical board had assessed his disability vide Ext.C1 at 51% . The Tribunal had treated the same as functional disability, and determined the compensation payable at Rs.8,99,640/- after reckoning Rs.7,000/- as his notional monthly income. Including the compensation paid on other nonconventional heads, the Tribunal arrived at a total compensation of Rs.9,99,896/-. This is now under challenge.

¶16

The learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company submitted that

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶18

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶19

the claimant is an auto rickshaw driver by avocation, and since the fractures are only to his right leg, the Tribunal ought not to have treated the entire 51% disability as functional disability.

¶20

Heard both sides. Since it is not disputed that the victim of the accident is an auto rickshaw driver, and that the accident itself had taken place in 2018, it would be reasonable to expect that he would be making atleast Rs.10,000/per month. And this Court also finds merit in the submissions of the counsel for the appellant and considers that the Tribunal ought not to have treated the disability as functional disability entirely. Therefore, this Court considers that 25% would be appropriate towards functional disability. So far as the conventional heads of compensation is concerned, this Court finds that the Tribunal has not awarded for loss of amenities, and makes certain modifications to the compensation awarded. The below table provides the details of the Tribunal award and the revised award now granted by this

¶21

Court :

¶22

*Sl.No.*	*Heads of Compensation*	*Award of* *Tribunal (Rs.)*	*Revised Award* *Amount (Rs.)*
1.	Loss of earning power	8,99,640.00	6,30,000.00
2.	Pain and suffering	40,000.00	40,000.00
3.	Medical expenses	16,256.00	16,256.00

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶24

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶25

¶26

*Sl.No.*	*Heads of Compensation*	*Award of* *Tribunal (Rs.)*	*Revised Award* *Amount (Rs.)*
4.	Nourishment	5,000.00	5,000.00
5.	Damage to clothing	2,000.00	2,000.00
6.	Transportation	5,000.00	5,000.00
7.	Attendant charges	32,000.00	32,000.00
8.	Loss of amenities	NIL	25,000.00
	Total :		7,55,256.00

¶27

Rounded off to : Rs.7,55,250/-

¶28

To conclude, the appeal is partly allowed, and the award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent and reduced from Rs.9,99,896/-. to Rs.7,55,250/-. The appellant is now directed to pay the said sum of Rs.7,55,250/- to the first respondent/claimant with interest at the rate of 7.5% less any amount which has been already deposited within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶29

11.12.2023

¶30

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order ds

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6

¶32

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶33

To:

¶34

The Chief Judicial Magistrate Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Cuddalore.

¶35

2.The Section Officer VR Section High Court, Madras.

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

¶37

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶38

N.SESHASAYEE.J.,

¶39

¶40

C.M.A.No.1641 of 2022

¶41

11.12.2023

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

The Divisional Manager v. R.Sivakumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Manager v. R.Sivakumar

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

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Poongodi

The Managing Director, Vs Mohammed Hassane

M.Pandian Vs S.Mahadevan

T.v.S.Vishalakshimi Vs N.Ramakrishnan

R.Ranjithavalli Vs S.Muthulakshmi

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Minor Jaasmitha