Partly allowed

Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., v. Mahalinga Gandhi

Madras HC29 Nov 2023CMA(MD)/1156/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the Tribunal's modification of compensation heads totaling the same amount was not erroneous. Allowing the appeal partly, the Court confirmed the total compensation of Rs. 1,99,500 with enhanced components for mental agony and extra nourishment, directing the insurance company to deposit the sum.

What did the court decide?

Compensation confirmed as Rs. 1,99,500/- with 7.5% interest; insurance company directed to deposit; appeal partly allowed.

Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs Mahalinga Gandhi — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 29.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

C.M.A.(MD)No.1156 of 2012

¶7

Oriental Insurance Company Limited, through its Manager, having its office at 6-A, North Cotton Street, Thoothukudi. ... Appellant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Mahalinga Gandhi 2.B.Ravi

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Thoothukudi made in M.C.O.P.No.288 of 2009 dated 18.04.2011.

¶12

For Appellant : Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran For R1 : No Appearance For R2 : Given Up

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

Challenging the compensation award passed by the learned Motor

¶15

Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶19

No.I, Thoothukudi, in M.C.O.P.No.288 of 2009 dated 18.04.2011, the appellant/second respondent has preferred this appeal.

¶20

2.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company submitted that the case is of injured claimant and the learned Tribunal has fixed the percentage of permanent disability at 80%. However, towards loss of income, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,76,000/-. The accident happened on 29.10.2008 and the loss of income ought to have been calculated for every percentage at a rate of Rs.2,000/and hence, according to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant an amount of Rs.16,000/- is exorbitant under the Head of loss of income.

¶21

3.However, a perusal of the said order would reveal that the extra amount of Rs.16,000/- could be adjusted towards extra nourishment which was awarded at Rs.2,500/- and mental agony, which was awarded at Rs.10,000/-. Hence, the compensation towards mental agony is enhanced to Rs.18,000/- and for extra nourishment is enhanced to Rs. 10,500/-. Thus the total amount awarded will remain the same. Thereby, the award of the learned Tribunal is partly modified.

¶22

2/6

¶23

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

¶24

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶25

Head	Compensation awarded before learned Tribunal	Compensation awarded before this Court	Reduced/Enhan ced/ Confirmed
(I)Partial Permanent Disability:	Rs.1,76,000/-	Rs.1,60,000/-	Reduced
(ii)Mental Agony:	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.18,000/-	Enhanced
(iii)Transportati on Expenses:	Rs.1,000/-	Rs.1,000/-	Confirmed
(iv)Medical Expenses:	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.10,000/-	Confirmed
(v)Extra nourishment:	Rs.2,500/-	Rs.10,500/-	Enhanced
Total compensation awarded:	Rs.1,99,500/-	Rs.1,99,500/-	Confirmed

¶26

The first respondent/claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.

¶27

1,99,500/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization. The appellant/insurance company is directed to deposit Rs.1,99,500/- with 7.5% interest from date of the claim petition till the date of realization and the amount if not deposited earlier, has to be deposited within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such deposit, the first

¶28

3/6

¶29

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

¶30

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶31

respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount with proportionate interest after deducting any amount received by him earlier without filing any formal petition before the Tribunal. The first respondent/claimant is not entitled for interest for the default period, if there is any.

¶32

5.In view of the same, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

29.11.2023

¶34

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mrn

¶35

4/6

¶36

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

¶37

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶38

¶39

1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Thoothukudi

¶40

2.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶41

5/6

¶42

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

¶43

C.M.A.(MD).No.1156 of 2012

¶44

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶45

Mrn

¶46

C.M.A.(MD)No.1156 of 2012

¶47

29.11.2023

¶48

6/6

¶49

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

Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., v. Mahalinga Gandhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., v. Mahalinga Gandhi

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

B.Divya Vs S.Bala Senthil Ganesh

The Branch Manager Vs Boopathy(Died)

Jothiammal (died) Vs Kathija Beevi

United India Ins Co. Ltd. Vs M.Rani

A.Boominathan Vs K.Phanindra Reddy, IAS

Prithiviraj Vs Guru,S/O.Muniyasamy