Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 4055 (MAD)

S. Kumar v. A. M. Ponnusamy

2013-11-29

S.VIMALA

body2013
Judgment : 1. The claimant, S.Kumar, aged 20, Tea Master by avocation, earning a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month, met with an accident on 22.07.2004. Four fingers on his both hands became crippled and thus, became less functional. In respect of the functional disability suffered, he claimed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-as compensation. The Tribunal quantified the compensation at Rs.70,000/- and the breakup details are as follows:- 2. Contending that the compensation awarded is inadequate, the claimant has filed this Appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the claimant / appellant submitted that, it is a fit case to apply the multiplier method of quantification in respect of loss of earning capacity and that the Tribunal failed to adopt the multiplier method. It is pointed out that, as per the evidence of the Doctor, the percentage of disability is 40% and therefore, multiplier method ought to have been applied. 3.1. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that the Tribunal has fixed the percentage of disability only at 20% and therefore, it is not a fit case to apply the multiplier method of quantification. 3.2. The main point to the considered is, whether it is the physical disability or the functional disability, which should be the criteria to calculate the loss on account of the permanent disablement. 3.3. The claimant is stated to be a Tea Master. According to the Doctor, four fingers on each of the hand of the claimant have become useless; some of them have been amputated and some of them, though remaining, are found to be useless. Therefore, the impact on earning capacity, as a Tea Master, will be total and permanent. Therefore, this is a fit case to apply the multiplier method, even though the percentage of disability is only 40, as fixed by the Doctor and 20 as fixed by the Tribunal. 3.4. Taking the monthly income at Rs.3,000/-, and taking the minimum percentage of disability as the basic factor, the loss of earning capacity would be (Rs.3,000/-x 12 x 20 100 x 18 (age of the claimant being 20)) Rs.1,29,600/-. 3.5. Having regard to the nature of injury, period of treatment, disfigurement and loss of marital prospects, the compensation has to be re-determined and the compensation is awarded, as per the details furnished below:- 4. 3.5. Having regard to the nature of injury, period of treatment, disfigurement and loss of marital prospects, the compensation has to be re-determined and the compensation is awarded, as per the details furnished below:- 4. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed, enhancing the quantum of compensation from Rs.70,000/- to Rs.2,33,600/-. 4.1. It is represented that the Insurance Company / second respondent has already deposited the amount, as ordered by the Claims Tribunal. Therefore, the Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced award amount along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of petition to till the date of deposit, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount, with accrued interest, less the amount already withdrawn, if any. There will be no order as to costs.