Dismissed

Jayaraman v. Dharmalingam

Madras HC24 Apr 2024CMA/317/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant appealed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's compensation award of Rs.5,18,679 for injuries in a motor accident, seeking enhancement of quantum. After a Medical Board reassessed disability at 25% against the Tribunal's 45%, the High Court found no grounds to interfere and confirmed the Tribunal's award.

What did the court decide?

Appellant permitted to withdraw the full deposited compensation of Rs.5,18,679 with accrued interest; appeal dismissed with no costs.

Jayaraman Vs Dharmalingam — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.04.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶7

Jayaraman S/o.Ponnusamy Reddy

¶8

... Appellant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Dharmalingam S/o.Karuppannan

¶11

2.The National Insurance Co., Ltd., 63, Rasi Plaza, West Pradhatchinam Road, Karur - 639 002.

¶12

3.The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office 1272-1273, Palaniyappa Complex, Mettur Road, Erode - 638 011.

¶13

4.Raman S/o.Periyapaiya Gounder ... Respondents

¶14

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.274 of 2018, dated 09.04.2021, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/

¶15

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

¶16

1/6

¶17

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶18

Special District Judge, Erode.

¶19

For Appellant : Mr.T.S.Arthanareeswaran For Respondents : Mr.D.Bhaskaran [R2 & R3]

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The appellant/claimant, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Special District Judge, Erode, in M.C.O.P.No.274 of 2018, dated 09.04.2021, has filed the present appeal.

¶23

Heard Mr.T.S.Arthanareeswaran, learned counsel for appellant and Mr.D.Bhaskaran, learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3.

¶24

In the instant case, the Tribunal, on considering the facts and

¶25

circumstances of the case and on appreciation of evidence, came to a conclusion that the accident had taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the offending vehicle. Having rendered such a finding, the Tribunal proceeded to award total compensation of Rs.5,18,679/- in the following manner:

¶26

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

¶27

2/6

¶28

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶29

*Sl.* *No.*	*Compensation awarded under the* *head*	*Amount* *(in Rs.)*
1.	45% disability	2,25,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	1,28,679/-
3.	Temporaryloss of income	60,000/-
4.	Pain and Sufferings	50,000/-
5.	Attender charges	25,000/-
6.	Additional Nutrition	15,000/-
7.	Transport expenses	15,000/-
	Total	5,18,679/-

¶30

The above compensation was directed to be paid with interest at 9% p.a.

¶31

The Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence, came to a categorical

¶32

conclusion that there was no proof to prove the avocation of the appellant/claimant and also the income that was earned by him. To come to such a conclusion, the Tribunal has given its reasoning at paragraph No.12 of the award. The Tribunal has also calculated the disability at 45% based on the disability certificate that was marked as Ex.P21. The appellant/claimant was not examined by the Medical Board. In view of the same, this Court directed the appellant/claimant to appear before the Medical Board and the Medical Board has assessed the disability suffered by the appellant/claimant and has submitted a report before this Court to the effect that the appellant/claimant suffers from 25% partial permanent

¶33

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

¶34

3/6

¶35

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶36

disability. The Tribunal has fixed the disability at 45%.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case

¶38

and also the award passed by the Tribunal, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal and the award of the Tribunal is confirmed as such.

¶39

It is represented that the second respondent insurance company has already deposited the entire compensation awarded by the Tribunal. In view of the same, it is left open to the appellant/claimant to withdraw the entire amount deposited by the second respondent insurance company, with accrued interest, on due application.

¶40

In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

¶41

24.04.2024

¶42

Speaking Judgment/Non-speaking Judgment Index :Yes/No Neutral citation: Yes/No gm To

¶43

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Judge, Erode.

¶44

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

¶45

4/6

¶46

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶47

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J

¶48

¶49

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

¶50

5/6

¶51

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶52

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.317 of 2022

¶53

24.04.2024

¶54

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

¶55

6/6

Jayaraman v. Dharmalingam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaraman v. Dharmalingam

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

E.Madhavi Vs K.Nehru

R. Saraswathi Vs Rrr Transport

The Managing Director Vs Rajendran

Magma Hdi General Insurance Company Limited Vs Kannan

Kamalraj Vs Meenakshi Sundaram

Harichandana Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs Inspector General of Registration