Madras High Court
M/S National Insurance Company Limited vs Mr.Infant Cleitus on 7 September, 2016
Author: T.Raja
Bench: T.Raja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07.09.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA C.M.A.No.1811 of 2016 M/s National Insurance Company Limited Motor Third Party Claims Office No.751, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 .. Appellant -Vs- 1. Mr.Infant Cleitus 2. Mr.Arun Jothi Sandosh Kumar .. Respondents Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 21.01.2016 made in M.C.O.P.No.6513 of 2013 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (III Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai. For Appellant :: Mrs.R.Sree Vidhya For Respondents :: Mr.R.Nalliyappan for R1/Caveator JUDGMENT
M/s National Insurance Company Limited, Chennai has come to this Court challenging the correctness of the impugned award dated 21.1.2016 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai in M.C.O.P.No.6513 of 2013, awarding a compensation of Rs.3,08,655/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from 6.11.2013 till the date of deposit, on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to take note of the vital aspect that the doctor had not treated the injured, therefore, his assessment could not be in accordance with the Schedule-I of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Adding further, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that when the doctor had not treated the first respondent/claimant, he could not have been allowed to support the claim of the injured.
2. Continuing her arguments, it was contended that when the doctor has not deposed that the injuries might affect the future studies of the injured, the certificate of disability showing that there was 70% disability is wholly unacceptable. However, when the Tribunal has fixed 60% disability, it is not known on what basis the Tribunal has reduced the disability from 70% to 60% accepting the evidence of the doctor, who has not even examined the injured claimant. Therefore, in any event, the approach adopted by the Tribunal is required to be interfered with, she pleaded.
3. This Court is not able to find any justification in the challenge to the impugned award for the following reasons. Admittedly, the first respondent/claimant was a second year student of Engineering course on the date of accident. While he was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-22-CF-3265 on 15.10.2013 at about 15.45 hours near the junction of Guindy Race Course road from North to South direction, a car bearing Registration No.TN-07-BU-8381 came behind in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the first respondent, as a result he sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was taken to Sri Balaji Hospital, Guindy for treatment and Ex.P2-discharge summary clearly shows that after he was admitted on 15.10.2013, he had been taking treatment for eleven days and got discharged only on 26.10.2013 from the hospital for the fracture of right clavicle and right mandible condyle. He also underwent a surgery on 16.10.2013, in which five screws were fixed in his right clavicle.
4. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence adduced by both sides, fixed the disability of the first respondent/claimant at 60% taking into consideration the relevant documents, namely, Ex.P9-disability certificate and Ex.P10-X-ray, in respect of the following injuries:-
5 screws have been fixed in the right clavicle.
Right Mandible Condyle & Wiring done. Fracture right clavicle DCP plate fixed.
(a) Malunited fracture right mandible at the condyle region. TM Joint fibroid. Opening the 2 (FB) mouthfully and chewing, speech difficult, - Disability-35%.
(b) Malunited fracture right clavicle fibrosis muscle. Abduction 80 degree IRER 50 degree limited. Plate in situ. Difficulty to work and carry weight with right hand. Disability-35%. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that the first respondent is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.3,000/- for each percentage of disability and arrived at the sum of Rs.1,80,000/- towards the compensation for disability. Again considering yet another fact that the injured was a second year Engineering student at the time of accident and had to pursue his third year course, the Tribunal was inclined to compensate the injured in terms of money for the loss of studies by taking a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month on the basis of his educational qualification and arrived at a sum of Rs.23,643/- (Rs.333 x 71 days = Rs.23,643) under this head. The Tribunal also found that a sum of Rs.1,50,702/- had been charged by Sri Balaji Hospitals, however, since the injured had claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- through medical insurance with Star Health & Allied Insurance Limited, it was inclined to grant a sum of Rs.50,702/- to the first respondent towards medical bills. The Tribunal also thought it fit to award a sum of Rs.2,310/- towards attender charges, Rs.2,000/- towards transportation expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards extra nourishment, Rs.5,000/- towards damage to clothes and vehicle, Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and a sum of Rs.25,000/- for pain and suffering to the injured. Therefore, when it is an admitted case that the first respondent was an Engineering student at the time of accident and also underwent a surgery on 16.10.2013 and that five screws had been fixed in the right clavicle on account of the aforementioned injuries, causing inconvenience to his day to day work, this Court is not able to find any error in the award of the Tribunal for arriving at the total compensation of Rs.3,08,655/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Though the learned counsel for the appellant requested this Court to refer the matter to the Lok Adalat for arriving at a settlement, this Court does not find merits in her submission.
5. For the reasons mentioned above, the civil miscellaneous appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, C.M.P.No.13345 of 2016 is also dismissed. Needless to mention that the appellant/Insurance company shall deposit the entire award amount together with interest thereon to the credit of the M.C.O.P.No.6513 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III Judge, Court of Small Causes), Chennai within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and that the first respondent/claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount on a proper application being made before the Tribunal. No costs.
Index : yes/no 07.09.2016
ss
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(III Judge, Court of Small Causes)
Chennai
T.RAJA, J.
ss
C.M.A.No.1811 of 2016
07.09.2016