Sadachi vs Murugan

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CMA No. 2389 of 2022
CNR:{HCMA010485342022}
Sadachi
W/o Chinnapaiyan,
Kattusellur Village, Memaloor Post,
Ulundurpettai Taluk, Villupuram District.
Temporarily residing at
Veraiyur Village and Post,
Thiruvannamalai Taluk
..Appellant(s)
Vs
1. Murugan
Age not known, S/o Kaliyan
No.693/3, School Street,
Sellankuppam Village, Gedar post,
Villupuram Taluk and District 605 402.
2. Divisional Manager
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
Hub 3rd Party Claims, Vijayalakshmi Complex
1st Floor, No.32/13 Phase No.2,
Sathuachari, Vellore 632 009
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgement and decree dated 28.08.2019 made in
MACTOP.No.466 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai and thus render justice.
For Appellant(s): Mr.A.G.F.Terry Chella Raja
For Respondent(s): M/s.K.Swaminathan
S.Adarsh for R2
__________
Page 1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Unsuccessful claimant has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in Award dated 28.08.2019
made in MACTOP.No.466 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.
2. Claim Petition has been filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the injury sustained by the claimant in a
road accident. According to the claimant, on 10.12.2016 at about 10.30 hours,
the claimant was proceeding from Thirukovilur to Elavanur and when nearing
st
Ramana School and walking on the left side of the road, at that time, the 1
respondent’s vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN 32 AJ 1519 driven by its driver in a
rash and negligent manner and dashed on the left side of the claimant, due to
which the claimant sustained injuries on left shoulder, Left Leg fracture, Back
side of Head, Chest and grievous injuries all over her body. According to the
st
claimant, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the 1
respondent’s driver. The claimant filed the claim petition claiming
compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-.
st
3. The 1 respondent / owner of the offending vehicle was called absent
and set exparte before the Tribunal.
__________
Page 2 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
nd
4. The 2 respondent / Insurance company has filed a counter statement
denying the manner of accident.
5. Before the Tribunal, the claimant herself was examined as PW1 and
marked Exs.P1 to P4. On the side of the respondent, RW1 and RW2 were
examined and Exs.R1 to R5 were marked. The Disability Certificate of the
Claimant was marked as Ex.C1.
6. Upon appreciation of evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal
found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the
rider of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal also finds that the rider of the
motorcycle was not having valid driving licence to drive the vehicle on the date
of accident and ordered pay and recovery. With regard to quantum of
compensation, the Tribunal considering Ex.C1- Disability Certificate assessed
by the Medical Board at 50 % permanent disability, considering the nature of
injuries sustained by the claimant viz., Fracture Left leg both bone with internal
fixator, the Tribunal has adopted percentage method by fixing Rs.3,000/- for
each percentage of disability and accordingly awarded compensation of
Rs.1,50,000/- under the head disability. The Tribunal has also awarded
compensation under other heads as hereunder:
__________
Page 3 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
Heads of Compensation Amount awarded
by the Tribunal
(in Rs.)
Permanent Disability [50% x Rs.3,000/- per
percentage ]
1,50,000
Pain and Suffering 50,000
Loss of Amenities 30,000
Extra Nourishment 30,000
Attender Charges 10,000
Transportation Charges 15,000
Total 2,85,000
Aggrieved over the same, the injured claimant has preferred this Appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant / claimant would
submit that the Tribunal failed to consider the injuries, disability and loss of
earning capacity. To prove the disability of the injured, the claimant was
referred to Medical Board, Tiruvannamalai, where his disability was assessed as
50% permanent disability, whereas the Tribunal failed to consider the loss of
earning capacity as 100%. The Tribunal also failed to consider the age, income
and occupation of the injured and at the time of accident, the injured was aged
about 55 years, working as Agricultural Coolie and earned about Rs.12,000/-
per month, whereas the Tribunal has fixed the monthly notional income of the
injured as Rs.6,000/- per month, which is unsustainable in law. The Tribunal
failed to consider the injuries sustained by the claimant like fracture of both
__________
Page 4 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
bone left leg and other multiple injuries all over the body. The Tribunal ought
to have adopted Multiplier Method instead of Percentage Method. To strengthen
his contentions, the learned counsel for the appellant has relief upon the
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of C.Karunakaran v. SRM
Transport India Pvt. Ltd. And another [Order dated 21.05.2025 in Civil
Appeal No.7162 of 2025] to show that “as a consequence of the accident, the
claimant – appellant is unable to move properly; faces difficulty in performing
daily tasks; and is unable to do continuous work, in that view of the matter, it
cannot be said that the accident has not affected his earnings and earning
capacity in his chosen vocation. Also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and Another [CDJ 2010 SC 1153] to
show that the Tribunal has to first decide whether there is any permanent
disability and if so, the extent of such permanent disability. If the Tribunal
concludes that there is no permanent disability, then there is no question of
proceeding further and determining the loss of future earning capacity. But, if
the Tribunal concludes that there is permanent disability, then it will proceed to
ascertain its extent. After the Tribunal ascertains the actual extent of permanent
disability of the claimant based on medical evidence, it has to determine
whether such permanent disability has affected or will affect his earning
capacity. On relying the above citations, the learned counsel for the appellant
contended that the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income of the
claimant and adopted multiplier method, instead of percentage method.
__________
Page 5 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
nd
8. Per contra , learned counsel appearing for the 2 respondent /
Insurance Company would submit that the claimant appeared before the
Medical Board, which assessed the disability of the claimant as 50% Permanent
Disability and issued Ex.C1-Disability Certificate, however, in Ex.C1, there is
mention about permanent disability, but there is no mention about any
functional disability. In the absence of proof of functional disability, the
Tribunal has rightly concluded that there is no loss of earning capacity and
adopted percentage method. Considering the fact that the accident took place in
the year 2016, the Tribunal fixed Rs.3,000/- for each percentage of disability
and accordingly awarded Rs.1,50,000/- under the head permanent disability.
The Tribunal has also awarded compensation under other heads, which appears
to be just and reasonable and does not require any interference. The learned
nd
counsel for the 2 respondent also submits that the Tribunal has rightly ordered
Pay and Recovery on the ground that the rider of the two wheeler did not
possess valid driving licence on the date of accident.
9. This Court considered the submissions made on either side and also
perused the entire materials available on record.
10. There is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident and the
negligence fixed on the rider of the two wheeler. The grievance of the appellant
__________
Page 6 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
is that the Tribunal failed to consider the injuries sustained by the claimant,
disability and loss of earning capacity and while the Medical Board has assessed
the disability of the claimant as 50% permanent disability as per Ex.C1, the
Tribunal has failed to consider the loss of earning capacity as 100%.
11. A perusal of Ex.C1-Disability Certificate issued by the Medical
Board, Government Tiruvannamalai Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai
dated 12.06.2018 shows that the claimant sustained fracture of left leg both
bone with internal fixator and assessed 50% permanent disability. It is relevant
to note that that there is no mention about functional disability under Ex.C1. A
perusal of Ex.P4-Discharge Summary issued by the Villupuram Government
Hospital, wherein it has been mentioned that the claimant was admitted on
10.12.2016 and discharged on 14.01.2017 and that the injured claimant was
diagnosed with Grade II compound, Left leg clavicle left lateral end, CRJF and
JMJL Tibial Nail and after closed reduction, fracture fixed with Tibia nails of
size 28 mm x 9 mm. Two distal one proximal interlocking screw applied.
Wound closed in layers. Sterile dressing done.
12. It is relevant to note that the claimant suffers from permanent
disability as a result of which, the fixation of compensation under the head Loss
of Future Earning Capacity depends upon the fact of loss of his earning
capacity. In the case on hand, the injured claimant was aged about 55 years at
__________
Page 7 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
the time of accident and she was working as an agricultural coolie and earning a
sum of Rs.6,000/- per month.
13. A perusal of Ex.C1- Disability Certificate issued by the Medical
Board would disclose that there is no mention about whether the disablement is
permanent or temporary and also there is no mention about any functional
disability caused to the claimant. There is no evidence, whether the claimant is
prevented or restrained from discharging her pervious avocation and functions
or some other less scale of operation so that she could continue to earn for her
livelihood. In such circumstances, in the absence of any evidence with regard
to functional disability and in the absence of any evidence with regard to loss of
earning capacity, the Tribunal has rightly adopted percentage method instead of
Multiplier Method.
14. It is relevant to note that the accident took place on 10.12.2016 and at
the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 55 years and as per Ex.C1 –
Disability Certificate, the deceased sustained Fracture left leg both bone with
internal fixator and assessed 50% permanent disability. At this juncture, it is
relevant to refer the judgment of this Court in M.Chinnathambi v. S.Deepa and
National Insurance Comkpany [CMA.No.4645 of 2019 dated 10.01.2020]
wherein for the accident occurred from the year 2016 onwards, Rs.5,000/- has
been awarded for each percentage of disability. By applying the ratio laid down
__________
Page 8 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
in the said decision, in the case on hand, the accident took place on 10.12.2016
and therefore, this Court fixes Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of disability and
accordingly, the compensation under Permanent Disability now awarded by this
Court would comes to Rs.2,50,000/- [Rs.5,000 / Percentage x 50%]. Upon
considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and the number of
days he has taken treatment, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
Pain and Suffering, Loss of Amenities, Extra Nourishment, Attender Charges
and Transportation Charges appears to be reasonable and does not require any
interference. Thus the compensation now modified by this Court is tabulated
hereunder:
Heads of Compensation Amount awarded by
the Tribunal (in Rs.)
Permanent Disability [50% x Rs.5,000/- per
percentage ]
2,50,000
Pain and Suffering 50,000
Loss of Amenities 30,000
Extra Nourishment 30,000
Attender Charges 10,000
Transportation Charges 15,000
Total 3,85,000
15. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the award dated 28.08.2019 made in MACTOP.No.466 of 2017 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai is
modified to the effect that the claimant is entitled for an enhanced compensation
__________
Page 9 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
of Rs.3,85,000/- now determined by this Court, together with interest @ 7.5.%
nd
p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit. The 2 respondent /
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount now
determined by this Court, less amount already withdrawn if any, within a period
of six weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. On such deposit, the
claimant is entitled to withdraw the same, less amount already withdrawn if any,
on filing appropriate application before the Tribunal. The claimant is not
entitled for any interest for the enhanced compensation for the default period.
The manner, mode and disbursement of compensation shall be as per the order
of the Tribunal. No costs.
27-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Jvm
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court, Madras.
__________
Page 10 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )

CMA No. 2389 of 2022
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
Jvm
CMA No. 2389 of 2022
27-10-2026
__________
Page 11 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 04:40:04 pm )