1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13/4/2016 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN C.M.A.No.2937 of 2006 1. S.P.Rajendiran 2. The National Insurance Company Ltd rep. By its Branch Manager Erode Town and Taluk. ... Appellants Vs 1. Saravanan 2. S. M.Mohammed Sulaiman ... Respondents Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub-Judge), Gobichettipalayam in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.297 of 2004 dated 30/11/2005. For appellants ... Mr.K.Suryanarayanan For respondents ... Mr.P.Thangavel. - - - - - - J U D G M E N T 2 This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub-Judge), Gobichettipalayam in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.297 of 2004 dated 30/11/2005. 2. On 1/9/2003, the first respondent herein and his friend Kannan went to Elumathur temple in a Company vehicle/TVS Suzuki bearing Registration No.TN28Y-9982. While returning, when the vehicle was driven by Kannan (friend of the first respondent herein) and the first respondent as a pillion rider, one Mahindra goods vehicle driven by the second respondent herein, came in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against TVS Suzuki, as a result of which the first respondent herein had sustained injuries and fracture. The first respondent herein had filed M.A.C.T.O.P.No.297 of 2004 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub-Judge), Gobichettipalayam, claiming compensation of Rs.11,23,000/-. 3. The Tribunal based on the oral and documentary evidence, granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 9% p.a. 3 S.No. Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal 1. Loss of Income Rs.5,000/- x 12 x 30% x 17 Rs.3,06,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs. 30,000/- 3. Pain & Suffering Rs. 10,000/- 4. Extra Nourishment Rs. 5,000/- T O T A L Rs.3,51,000/- 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and perused the materials available on record. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company/second appellant would submit that the Tribunal had erroneously adopted the multiplier method under second schedule to Section 163 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and awarded compensation for loss of earning power without following the provisions of Section 4 (I) (c) (ii) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. 6. It is not in dispute that the claimant suffered injuries in left shoulder bone fracture and cut injury in the chest and forehead and disability was assessed at 36%, as per Ex.A.16 and he was admitted in Government Hospital, Coimbatore and thereafter at Sundar Hospital, Erode. Even though the income was claimed by the claimant at Rs.7,000/- p.m., as 4 per Ex.A.7, the Tribunal has fixed the income at Rs.5,000/- and awarded compensation adopting multiplier in various heads. As the quantum alone has been questioned by the Insurance Company, taking note of the injury and the nature of treatment and the percentage of disability at 36% taken by the Tribunal, this Court feels that the quantum of compensation determined by the Tribunal need not be interfered with. 7. In view of the above, finding no merit, by confirming the award of the Tribunal, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 8. The Appellants herein are directed to deposit the entire award amount together with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of claim petition, before the Tribunal, if not already deposited, within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such deposit being made, the respondents are entitled to make necessary application to withdraw the same. 13/4/2016 mvs. 5 To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub-Judge), Gobichettipalayam S.VAIDYANATHAN,J 6 mvs. C.M.A.No.2937 of 2006 13/4/2016