P. Achuthan vs R. Ammerjan

R. Subbiah, J.—Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Dharmapuri, in and by award dated 29.12.2011 in M.C.O.P. No. 676 of 2009, the claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation amount.

Since the present appeal has been filed challenging the quantum of compensation alone, I am not dealing with the other aspects of the award passed by the Tribunal.

It is the case of the claimant before the Tribunal that on 31.1.2008 at about 9.00 am, when he was riding his two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN-29-E-9947 on the Hosur-Adhiyamankottai Main Road, a lorry bearing Registration No. TN-46-0156 owned by the 1st respondent herein and insured with the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company, came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite side and dashed against the two-wheeler and thus, caused the accident. In the said accident, the claimant sustained grievous injury on the left leg and on account of the same, his left leg below the knee was amputated. It is further case of the claimant that he is a bachelor and because of the amputation of his left leg, his opportunity for the marriage has diminished. Hence, he made a claim for a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs as compensation as against the owner of the vehicle and its insurer/Insurance Company.

In order to prove the claim, on the side of the claimant, the claimant examined himself as P.W. 1, besides examining two doctors as P.W. 2 & 3 and marked 16 documents as Ex. P. 1 to Ex. P. 16. On the side of the respondents, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

The Tribunal, based on the evidence of the Doctors, has fixed the disability suffered by the claimant/victim at 70% and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,40,000/- under the head of permanent disability. That apart, the Tribunal by calculating the compensation under different heads, has passed an award for a total sum of Rs. 7,10,522/- as compensation. Break up details of the total compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal are as follows:-

Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the present appeal has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of the compensation amount.

It is the main submission of the learned counsel for the claimant/appellant herein that on account of the accident, the claimant''s left leg below the knee was amputated and therefore, he suffered total permanent disability. Under such circumstances, the Tribunal, by applying the multiplier method, ought to have made the calculation for the compensation under the head of loss of earning power. But, instead of doing so, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/- per percentage of disability and awarded a meager amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- in proportion to 70% disability under the head of disability. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the claimant, by applying multiplier method, the compensation amount has to be calculated in proportion to 70% disability. In this regard, the learned counsel for the claimant relied on the judgment delivered by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 8215-8216 of 2009, dated 23-4-2014 in the case of Dinesh Singh Vs. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ltd.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company submitted that though it was stated by the claimant that at the time of accident, he was working as Senior Cashier in Agricultural Co-operative Societies Bank, Dharmapuri, and was earning a sum of Rs. 7,668/-, absolutely no evidence was produced on the side of the claimant to show that on account of the disability suffered by him, he lost his job. Even as on date, he is continuing his job. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, since there is absolutely no loss of income to the claimant as he is continuing his job, it is not a fit case to apply multiplier method.

Keeping the submissions made on either side, I have carefully gone through the entire materials available on record and I find that on account of the accident, the victim/claimant had sustained grievous injuries, which resulted in amputation of his left leg below the knee. But, as contented by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the claimant has not produced any evidence to show that he lost his job. Even as on date, he is continuing his job. Hence, there is no loss of income to the claimant.

However, now it is the main contention of the learned counsel for the claimant that since there is total permanent disability suffered by the claimant on account accident, multiplier method has to be adopted in this case. In this regard, the learned counsel for the claimant relied on the judgment delivered by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 8215-8216 of 2009, dated 23-4-2014 in the case of Dinesh Singh Vs. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ltd.

But, on perusal of the said judgment, I find that the factual aspects of that case would show that in that case, the claim petition was filed by an B.E., Decree holder and he was working as a quality Engineer in Hospet Steels Ltd. and at the time of accident, he was earning a sum of Rs. 17,200/- per month and due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, he was out of employment for a period of two years and subsequently, since he was not in a position to continue his job, he resigned his job and took up a desk-job in Industrial development Bank of India. Only in that situation, the Hon''ble Supreme Court has come to the conclusion that there is loss of income to the petitioner therein on account of the injuries sustained by him and applied multiplier method to calculate the compensation amount.

But, in the instant case, absolutely, no evidence is available before the Court to show as to whether the victim/claimant has lost his job on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident. Under such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the question of applying multiplier method does not arise in this case.

However, considering the fact that the victim/claimant would find it difficult to do his day-to-day works due to amputation of his left leg below the knee, as he was doing before the accident, he is entitled for compensation under the head of loss of amenities. Hence, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- is hereby awarded under the head of loss of amenities. Considering the fact that due to the long duration of the treatment undergone by the victim/claimant, he would have suffered severe mental agony, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is hereby awarded under the head of mental agony. Further, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount for attendant charges. Hence, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is hereby awarded under the head of attendant charges.

Further, I find that the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for extra-nourishment, which is on the lesser side. Hence, a sum of Rs. 25,000/- is hereby awarded for extra-nourishment, by adding another sum of Rs. 20,000/-. Similarly, sum of Rs. 2,850/- awarded by the Tribunal for transportation is on the lower side. Hence, the same is hereby enhanced to a sum of Rs. 12,000/-. Except the above modifications, the award passed by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed in all other aspects.

Consequently, the total compensation amount of Rs. 7,10,522/- (Rupees seven lakhs ten thousand and five and twenty two only) awarded by the Tribunal is hereby modified and enhanced to a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees nine lakhs only). Break up details of the modified/enhanced compensation amount are as follows-

In view of the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire modified/enhanced compensation amount of Rs. 9 lakhs, with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit, to the credit of the above said MCOP, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same, by making necessary application before the Tribunal.