B.Elumalai v. K.Loganathan

JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant challenging the award passed by the Special Sub Judge No.I to deal with MCOP Cases, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai. in MCOP No.5148 of 2014 dated 15.06.2023, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶2The case of the claimant is that on 12.03.2014, when he was travelling as a passenger in a TATA tourist van which was proceeding from Chennai to Trichy, at about 14.00 hours, the driver of the vehicle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in the vehicle hitting the centre median wall. The claimant suffered left clavicle fracture. It is under these circumstances, the claim petition came to be filed before the Tribunal.

¶3The Tribunal, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence came to a conclusion that the accident had taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the van.

¶4The Tribunal, having rendered the above finding, proceeded to fix the total compensation at Rs.2,45,900/- under the following heads: Sl.No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.)

¶1Disability 80,000

¶2Pain and Suffering 25,000

¶3Transport expenses 4,000

¶4Medical expenses 77,928

¶5Extra Nourishment 10,000

¶6Attender charges

¶7Loss of Earnings 18,000

¶8Loss of Amenities 10,000

¶9Future treatment medical expenses 20,000 Total 2,45,828 Round off to 2,45,900 The above compensation was directed to be paid together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

¶5Heard Ms.Ramya V.Rao, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant and Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan, learned counsel for the second respondent/Insurance Company.

¶6The Tribunal found that the insurance policy was granted only for twelve occupants and one driver, whereas, at the time of the accident, nearly 17 passengers were travelled apart from the driver. In view of the same, the Tribunal found that there was a violation of policy conditions and accordingly ordered for pay and recovery.

¶7The appellant/claimant, aggrieved by the award, has filed the present appeal before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶8The main ground urged by the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant is that the appellant/claimant had undergone an operation and underwent treatment as an inpatient for three days and therefore, considering the nature of the injuries sustained, the Tribunal ought to have fixed higher compensation. The compensation fixed under various heads is on the lower side, which requires the interference of this Court.

¶9Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal has fixed the fair and just compensation under each head and it does not require the interference of this Court.

¶10In the case in hand, the appellant/claimant sustained a left clavicle fracture and he was also taking treatment as an inpatient from

13.03.2014 to 15.03.2014 in a private hospital and his disability was assessed by the Medical Board at 20% permanent Disability. In view of the same, the claimant would not have been able to attend his work for at least 3 months since he was a carpenter. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to fix the compensation under the head 'loss of earning' at Rs.27,000/- (Rs.9,000/- x 3 months). This Court is also inclined to enhance the attender charges to Rs.5,000/-. The compensation fixed under the other heads is reasonable and it does not require the interference of this Court.

¶11In the light of the above discussion, the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is modified as follows:- Sl.No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.) Modified by this Court (in Rs.)

¶1Disability 80,000 80,000

¶2Pain and Suffering 25,000 25,000

¶3Transport expenses 4,000 4,000

¶4Medical expenses 77,928 77,928

¶5Extra Nourishment 10,000 10,000

¶6Attender charges 5,000

¶7Loss of Earnings 18,000 27,000

¶8Loss of Amenities 10,000 10,000

¶9Future treatment medical expenses 20,000 20,000 Total 2,45,828 2,58,928 Round off 2,45,900 2,59,000

¶12The compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,45,900/- is enhanced to Rs.2,59,000/-. The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation, less the amount already deposited, together with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. Insofar as the enhanced compensation is concerned, the deficit court fee, if not paid, shall be paid by the appellant/claimant. The other directions issued by the Tribunal with regard to the mode of payment of compensation remains unaltered. It is made clear that the Tribunal itself has ordered for pay and recover and the same is sustained.

¶13In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.

02.07.2026 ham To

¶1The Special Sub Judge No.I, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

¶2The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras. N. ANAND VENKATESH

, J.

ham

02.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02.07.2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH B.Elumalai S/o.Balakrishnan ... Appellant Vs. 1. K.Loganathan 2. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., "Rals Tower", 2nd Floor, Plot No.2054, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation in MCOP No.5148 of 2014 dated 15.06.2023 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Court No.I, MCOP Tribunal/Small Causes Court, Chennai. For Appellant : Ms.Ramya V.Rao For Respondent : Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan for R2