Partly allowed

Packiyaraj v. Balakrishnan

Madras HC12 Feb 2024CMA(MD)/256/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant whose right leg was amputated after a road accident appealed for enhanced compensation. The court raised notional income to Rs.9,000 with 40% future prospects, added Rs.50,000 under loss of amenities, and awarded total Rs.23,43,799 with 7.5% interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.23,43,799 with 7.5% interest; insurer directed to deposit within four weeks.

Packiyaraj Vs Balakrishnan — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 12.02.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

Packiyaraj

... Appellant

Vs.

1.Balakrishnan

2.The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co-operative Limited, Tenkasi Road, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, against the order and decree, dated 27.09.2021, made in M.C.O.P.No.205 of 2019, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputtur.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For R1 : No appearance For R2 : Mr.R.Rajamani *****

¶14

JUDGEMENT

¶15

The claimant has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

¶16

2.It is a case of injury. Due to accident, the claimant’s right leg from knee

¶17

was amputated. The contention of the claimant is that the Tribunal has fixed

¶18

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

¶19

1/5

¶20

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶21

notional income as Rs.7,500/- per month. The minimum notional income is fixed as Rs.8,000/- per month. In the particular case, the claimant is having license and he is a Driver by avocation. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that Rs.9,000/- per month would be the proper fixation of notional income with 40% for the future prospects which will come around Rs.12,600/- and this would be the appropriate fixation for future prospects.

¶22

As far as the pain and suffering is concerned, the Tribunal has fixed Rs. 50,000/-, which is on lower side. Further the Tribunal has not granted for loss of amenities. This Court is of the considered opinion rather than increasing the amount under pain and suffering, it is sufficient to grant compensation under loss of amenities. Hence, if an additional of Rs.50,000/- is added under loss of amenities the same would be just and fair compensation. The amount granted under other heads are confirmed. If the Insurance Company has not deposited,

¶23

this Court is directing the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation within four weeks including the enhanced compensation. The modified compensation awarded by this Court is as under:

¶24

i.	Monthlyincome of the injured	Rs.9,000/-
ii.	Futureprospects(40%)	Rs.3,600/-
Total		Rs.12,600/-

¶25

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

¶26

2/5

¶27

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶28

Sl.No.	Head of Compensation	Modified award granted by this Court	Award granted by the Tribunal
1.	Functional Disability (Rs.12,600/- * 12 * 17* 77/100)	Rs.19,79,208/- (enhanced)	Rs.11,78,100/-
2.	Medical Expenses	Rs.2,44,591/- (confirmed)	Rs.2,44,591/-
3.	Pain and Sufferings and Loss of Amenities	Rs.1,00,000/- (enhanced)	Rs.50,000/- (Pain and Suffering)
4.	Transportation	Rs.10,000/- (confirmed)	Rs.10,000/-
5.	Attender Charges	Rs.10,000/- (confirmed)	Rs.10,000/-
Enhan by this	ced Total compensation granted Court	Rs.23,43,799/-	Total compensation awarded by Tribunal = Rs.14,97,691/-

¶29

4.The 2^nd respondent / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the sum of Rs.23,43,799/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same with accrued interests and costs, less the amount already withdrawn by him, if any, by filing appropriate application before the Tribunal.

¶30

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

¶31

3/5

¶32

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶33

With the above said directions, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly

¶34

allowed. No costs.

¶35

12.02.2024

¶36

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

¶37

Tmg

¶38

¶39

1.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputtur.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

4/5

¶43

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶44

S.SRIMATHY, J.

¶45

Tmg

¶46

C.M.A(MD)No.256 of 2022

¶47

12.02.2024

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Packiyaraj v. Balakrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Packiyaraj v. Balakrishnan

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

Rooth Gnanadeepam, Vs Daniel Gunasekarraja

The Managing Director Vs Marakatham @ Geetha

S.Chellamal( Died) P.Thiruvannamalaiyammal (Died) 1.K. Shanmuga Perumal Vs M.Arunachala Pandian

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Vs Arasangam

Chengan (Died and Exonerated), C. Veeramani, Vs C.Kannan

Nargis Sulthana Vs Raja