Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2237 (MAD)

Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Pitchiah

2017-07-26

J.NISHA BANU

body2017
JUDGMENT : Prayer :- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award made in I.A.No.688 of 2011 in M.C.O.P.No. 157 of 2010 dated 28.02.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District Judge (Fast Tract Court No.II), Thoothukudi. 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been filed against the award made in I.A.No.688 of 2011 in M.C.O.P.No.157 of 2010 dated 28.02.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District Judge (Fast Tract Court No.II), Thoothukudi and set aside the same. 2. Since the issues are inter-related to each other, both the petitions are taken up together and decided by a common judgment. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the rank mentioned before the Court below. 4. The case of the appellant before the Court below is that he filed a claim petition claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident and after full trial, this Court passed an award of Rs.2,65,460/- to the appellant on 16.03.2011. The further case of the appellant is that though the appellant filed five sets of medical bills, only one set of medical bill was marked and other four sets of medical bills were not marked and amount of Rs.35,460/- is only taken into account. The amount found in the other four sets of medical bills in Ex.P.5 and amount found in Ex.P. 15 medical bill were not taken into account by the Court below. Hence, the appellant filed I.A.No.688 of 2011 and the same was allowed by the Court below. Aggrieved over the same, the insurance company has preferred C.M.A.(MD).No.1459 of 2012 challenging the quantum awarded by the Tribunal. Similarly, the appellant has filed C.M.A.(MD).2048 of 2013 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the tribunal. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the injured lost his eye sight and therefore, a separate compensation should have been awarded by the Court below and in this regard, he prays that multiplier method should be adopted for arriving at compensation. However, the Court below has failed to adopt the same and ignored the other four sets of medical bills submitted by the tribunal. Hence, he prays for appropriate orders. 6. However, the Court below has failed to adopt the same and ignored the other four sets of medical bills submitted by the tribunal. Hence, he prays for appropriate orders. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the insurance company would submit that first of all, in the case on hand, review is not at all maintainable and the Court below ought to have dismissed the impugned order which is challenged in this civil miscellaneous petition. He also alleges that there are no set of medical bills were omitted to be included in the judgment as alleged by the appellant. Hence, he prays for appropriate orders. 7. Both the civil miscellaneous petitions can be decided once this Court answers the following issues:- (i) Whether the medical bills submitted by the claimant in the case on hand which was omitted to be taken into account by the Court below can subsequently be considered or not? (ii) Whether the appellant is entitled to get compensation due to loss of eye-sight by applying the multiplier method? 8. As far as the first issue is concerned, it is not the case of the insurance company that the injured has forged the medical bills or it was subsequently produced after the pronouncement of the impugned judgment. On the part of the claimant, it was rightly produced before the Court below during the course of the hearing and the Court below failed to take note of the said medical bills produced by the injured. Because of the mistake committed by the Court below, the claim of the injured cannot be ignored. On review, the Court below has rightly accepted its inadvertent mistake and allowed the medical bills, in which, this Court could not find any error or infirmity in the impugned judgment. Hence, I answer that if the medical bills are inadvertently omitted to be taken by the Court below due to the mistake committed by it, it can always be taken into account but within a reasonable time. 9. Coming to the second point that in case of loss of eyes, whether multiplier method to be adopted or not, it is needless to mention that the eyes are the most beautiful parts of the human body. 9. Coming to the second point that in case of loss of eyes, whether multiplier method to be adopted or not, it is needless to mention that the eyes are the most beautiful parts of the human body. It may not be out of place to mention the following few lines to emphasise how the eyes are more important in our day today life:- Ask a cricketer; he would tell, how the hands are more important for him to shine in his field. Ask an athlete; he would tell, how the legs are more important for him to achieve Olympic medal? Ask a woman; she would tell, how the hair are more important for her. Ask a musician, he would tell, how the ears are more important for him. Ask a singer, she would tell, how the tongue is important. Ask a cook, he would tell, how the nose is more important for him. But, if we ask anybody to compare with the eyes to any part of our human body, no one will have answer for it, in alternative, it can never be compensated by any means. Such importance is given to the eyes for human-beings to live in this beautiful world. It is really pity that a man lives without eyes is nothing but a man lives in a vegetative state. Even a disabled man can get employment in a private organisation depending upon his disability, but, in the case of blind, it is very difficult to find a job. The government alone will have the avenue to safe guard their interest. 10. It may not be an exaggeration to state that a man without eyes is a child living in a womb of a woman. Until the child comes out, the child cannot see this beautiful world and what is happening around it? Because eyes are considered to be the umbilical cord of our whole parts of the body. Similarly, a man who lost his eyesight is a child and he has to completely depend on even for his basic needs to somebody else through out his life. It is more tragedy that a man who lose his eyes in the accident because all along he would have enjoyed this beautiful world in a way he likes, but, due to the accident, his blossomed life shrinks like a frog in a well. It is more tragedy that a man who lose his eyes in the accident because all along he would have enjoyed this beautiful world in a way he likes, but, due to the accident, his blossomed life shrinks like a frog in a well. In the case on hand, at the time of accident, the claimant was 22 years old and because of the accident, the marriage life of the claimant some what would have definitely been doomed, which cannot be compensated in terms of monetary compensation. 11. Perfect compensation is hardly possible but one has to keep in mind that the Court has done no wrong; in the case on hand, he has suffered at the hands of the wrongdoer and this court must take care to give him a fair compensation for that he had suffered. Because, though he will live, he cannot earn his living. Each case has to be considered in the light of its own facts and at the end, one must ask whether the sum awarded is a fair and reasonable sum. Time and again, the Supreme Court has held in various decisions that the compensation is payable for loss of income as well as for disability should be very reasonable. 12. In the light of the above discussion and observation, it is the fittest case where multiplier method can be applied. Though the claimant has suffered over all 90% disability, I am of the view that the disability suffered by the claimant on his left eye, the disability can be taken as 100% permanent disability. That apart, though the Court below has recorded in his finding that he could not continue his job further, it has granted only temporary loss of income, which is not sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore, though the claimant has not produced any documents to prove his income, applying the judgment of the Supreme Court in SYED SADIQ v. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., reported in 2014 (1) TN MAC 459 and going by the present state of economy and the rising prices in the day-today affairs, notional income of Rs. 6,500/- is fixed for the claimant. Further, as per the judgment in Sarla Varma Vs. LTD., reported in 2014 (1) TN MAC 459 and going by the present state of economy and the rising prices in the day-today affairs, notional income of Rs. 6,500/- is fixed for the claimant. Further, as per the judgment in Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, reported in 2009 SC 3104, if 50% of the income is taken for future prospects of the deceased, which comes to Rs.3,250/- and put together, it would be around Rs.9,750/-, in which if 50% is deducted towards personal expenses, it works out to Rs.6,500/- and in view of the earlier discussion by this Court, the Tribunal ought to have fixed the multiplier method and therefore, if multiplier 18 is adopted, it works out to Rs.6,500 x 12 x 18=Rs.14,04,000 towards his loss of income. In all other aspects, the amount already awarded by the tribunal to the claimant stands confirmed. 13. In the light of the observations and discussions, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2048 of 2013 filed by the claimant is disposed of granting enhanced compensation amount of Rs.14,04,000/- less the amount already granted by the tribunal towards partial permanent disability and temporary loss of income, which works out to Rs.12,12,000/- (Rs.14,04,000 – Rs.1,80,000+Rs. 12,000). The enhanced award amount shall be paid along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till date of realisation and proportionate costs; 14. For the foregoing reasons states supra, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal preferred by the Insurance Company C.M.A.No.1459 of 2012 stands dismissed. 15. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount, namely, Rs.12,12,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs and Twelve Thousand only) along with accrued interest and costs, less the amount deposited, if any, to the credit of in I.A.No.688 of 2011 in M.C.O.P.No.157 of 2010 dated 28.02.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Additional District Judge (Fast Tract Court No.II), Thoothukudi, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; 16. On compliance of payment of additional Court Fees, if any, by the claimant, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the entire award amount along with accrued interest and costs directly to the Personal Savings Bank Account Number of the appellant-claimant, through RTGS/NEFT system, after getting his Account Details, within a period of two weeks, thereafter; and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.