In a couple of appeals filed before the Madras High Court regarding a judgment and decree dated 21-12-2021, passed by I Additional Sub Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore, a Single Judge Bench of Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi partly allowed both appeals and enhanced the compensation to be paid to the claimant for suffering injuries in a motor accident.
On 03-12-2015, the 12-year-old claimant was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle driven by his father. Suddenly, an ambassador car, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle and, as a result, the claimant suffered a fracture along with multiple injuries. Hence, the claim was filed seeking Rs. 15,00,000/- as compensation.
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. (NICL) resisted the claim, contending that the owner of the offending vehicle was plying her vehicle without a valid and effective fitness certificate, and that, hence, NICL was not liable to pay any compensation.
The Tribunal concluded that the accident was caused by the negligence of the driver of the insured vehicle and awarded compensation of Rs. 2,50,216/-, while directing NICL to pay the same with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the present appeals were filed.
The minor claimant argued that the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs. 3,00,000/- under permanent disability by following the Supreme Court’s decision in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited & Anr. 2013 (2) TN MAC 338. However, NICL contended that the Tribunal ought to have ordered pay and recovery and that exorbitant amounts had been awarded as compensation.
The Court noted that the disability of the minor claimant was assessed at 30% by the medical board and awarded Rs. 3,00,000/- towards partial permanent disability as per Master Mallikarjun (supra). Hence, the compensation was enhanced from Rs. 2,50,216/- to Rs. 4,30,216/-. Further, the Court noted that the claimant had failed to establish that the insured vehicle had an effective Fitness Certificate, and that operating a vehicle without one violates the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The Court stated that the assurance of a vehicle being completely fit to be plied on the road assumes importance in relation to the life and limb of people travelling in the vehicle, pedestrians, and other vehicles. Thus, the Court directed NICL to pay the enhanced compensation with 7.5% interest to the claimant at the first instance and then recover the same from the owner, which, the Court opined, should have been done by the Tribunal.
Lastly, the Court directed the amount to be deposited into a fixed deposit with any nationalized bank and permitted the guardian of the minor claimant to withdraw the interest amount once every three months until he attains majority.
Appearances:
CMA No. 1158 of 2022 –
For Appellant – Ms. Ramya V. Rao
For Respondents – Mr. M. Krishnamoorthy
CMA No. 1308 of 2023 –
For Appellant – Mr. M. Krishnamoorthy
For Respondents – Ms. Ramya V. Rao
