IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.10.2008 CORAM Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.89 of 2008 and M.P. No. 1 of 2008 The Branch Manager. United India Insurance Co Ltd Ramanathapuram Coimbatore .. Appellant/ 2nd respondent Vs. 1. Regitha 2.R. Balasubramanian ... respondents/ petitioner/ I respondent Appeal filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 27.7.2005 in MCOP No. 701 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Krishnagiri For Appellant : Mr. T. Ravichandran For 1st Respondent : Mr.Arvind Subramanian For 2nd respondent : given up JUDGMENT The United India Insurance Company has filed this appeal challenging the award and decree dated 27.7.2005 in MCOP No. 701 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Krishnagiri. 2. Notice of admission was ordered on 21.1.2008. The first respondent has been served and appeared through counsel. 3. It is a case of injury. The accident in this case happened on 24.7.2003. The injured claimant Regitha, aged 50 years, house wife, was travelling in a TATA Sumo vehicle, which https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ collided with another TATA Sumo vehicle. In that accident, she suffered fracture of the right collar bone. She was treated at Government Hospital, Avinasi for 2 days and thereafter, she took further treatment between 17.4.2002 to 26.4.2002 privately. She claimed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries suffered. 4. In support of the claim petition, the claimant was examined as P.W.1. Dr. Ashokkumar, was examined as P.W.2. Documents Exs. A1 to A7 were marked. Ex.A1 is the copy of the F.I.R. Ex.A2 is the copy of the accident register. Ex.A3 is the wound certificate. Ex.A4 is the copy of the insurance policy. Ex.A5 is the transport receipt. Ex.A6 is the disability certificate. Ex.A7 is the x-ray. No oral and documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant/ first respondent before the Tribunal. 5. According to the claimants, the income of the injured was Rs.3,000/- pm. However, no document was filed to prove the same. The Tribunal, considering the nature of injury, age, period of treatment and the disability assessed at 30% under Ex.A6, granted the following amount as compensation with interest at the rate 9% p.a. Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Injuries Rs.50,000/- 2 Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/- 3 Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- 4 Damage to articles Rs. 2,000/- 5 Medical expenses Rs.40,000/- 6 Future medical expenses Rs.20,000/- 7 Pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- 8 Permanent disability Rs.20,000/- Total Rs.1,52,000/- 6. Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that for the injury to the collar bone, which healed after treatment, the Tribunal awarded higher compensation. It erred in granting compensation on two heads viz., injury and permanent disability. For medical expenses, no document was filed, however, a sum of Rs.40,000/- was granted based on oral evidence. The sum of Rs.20,000/- granted for future medical expenses is also not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ supported by any evidence. Therefore, he pleaded for reduction of compensation. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the respondent – claimant, who stated that the injured claimant is a 50 years old lady and therefore, she would need proper treatment to recoup herself to support the family. Her injury to shoulder bone is serious to affect her for the rest of her life time. He contended that meager amount has been granted for extra nourishment and transport expenses. For disability assessed at 30%, lesser amount of Rs.20,000/- alone is granted and no amount was granted for attender charges. He therefore justified the award. 8. In view of the decision of the Full Bench decision in Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd. -v.- Ahmed Thambi reported in 2006 (4) C.T.C. 433. wherein the Full Bench set out the head under which compensation should be granted in a case of injury . The relevant portion reads as follows:- "In the non-pecuniary losses the Tribunal shall consider: (a) pain and suffering, (b) loss of amenity, (c) loss of expectation of life, hardship, mental stress etc. (d) loss of prospect of marriage and under the head pecuniary losses, the Tribunal shall consider loss of earning capacity and loss of future earnings as one component apart from medical and other expenses and loss of earning, if any from the date of accident till the date of trial. When loss of earning capacity is compensated as also the non-pecuniary losses under (a) to (d), permanent disability need not be separately itemised." 9. In the present case, the compensation has been granted both for injury and disability, which cannot be sustained as there is no justification shown for the same. Further, without any basis or records, a sum of Rs.40,000/- has been granted for medical expenses and Rs.20,000/- for future medical expenses and the compensation on these heads has to be interfered or modified so that just compensation can be granted . For pain and suffering, the Tribunal has granted meager sum and that has to be enhanced. Therefore, the claimant, 50 years old lady, is entitled to adequate compensation for the injuries suffered and disability assessed. No amount has been granted for attender charges and meager amount has been granted for extra nourishment. Considering all these aspects, the award of the Tribunal stands modified as follows:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal Amount granted by this Court 1 Injuries Rs.50,000/- --- 2 Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 3 Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 7,500/- 4 Damage to articles Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 2,000/- 5 Medical expenses Rs.40,000/- Rs. 20,000/- 6 Future medical expenses Rs.20,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 7 Pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- Rs. 30,000/- 8 Permanent disability Rs.20,000/- Rs. 40,000/- 9 Attender charges --- Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.1,52,000/- Rs.1,14,500/- 10. Since the accident happened in the year 2002 and the award was passed in the year 2005, the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% stands modified to 7.5% in lieu of the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2005 (3) C.T.C. 373 (Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation vs. S.Rajapriya). 11. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed as follows:- (i) The award of the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.1,14,500/- from Rs.1,52,000/-. (ii) The interest stands reduced to 7.5% from 9% p.a. (iii) Learned counsel for the appellant states that entire award amount has already been deposited. The claimant is entitled to withdraw the award amount as per the order of this Court. (iv) The appellant is entitled to withdraw the excess amount in deposit after settling the claimant. (v) there shall be no orders as to costs. (vi) Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2008 is closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. ra https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Krishnagiri. 1 cc to Mr.M. Aravind Subramanian, Advocate, SR. 18871 1 cc to Mr.T. Ravichandran, Advocate, Sr. 60417 CMA No. 89 of 2008 CK (CO) kk 16/12 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/