SANTHOSH vs THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CMA No. 2622 of 2024
CNR: {HCMA011199262024}
Santhosh
S/o. Periyasamy, 3/64, Nilavarapatty, Trichy Main
Road, Salem - 201.
..Appellant(s)
Vs
The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Salem
Ltd., 3/137, Salamedu, Vazhuthareddy Post,
Villupuram Taluk
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, by enhancing the compensation awarded in the fair and decretal
order, dated 26.04.2023 passed in MCOP No.2023 of 2019, on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Special Sub Court No.1, Salem) .
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Amar D.Pandiya
For Respondent(s) : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran
JUDGMENT
Unsuccessful claimant has preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
__________
Page1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
2. Claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him, in a road accident.
3. According to the claimant, on 06.07.2016, at about 12.30 a.m., he was
travelling in a TNSTC bus bearing Registration No. TN 32 N 3749 from Salem
to Villupuram. When the bus was nearing the Thalaivasal bus stop, driven by its
driver in a rash and negligent manner and hit another bus bearing Registration
No. TN 30 N 0803, which was standing at the bus stop. As a result, the
claimant sustained injuries to his left thigh. Immediately, he was taken to the
Government Hospital, Attur, for treatment. Hence, the accident occurred solely
due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. It is the further
claim of the claimant that he was aged about 27 years at the time of accident
and was working as a civil engineer and earning Rs.35,000/- per month.
4. The respondent Transport Corporation filed a counter statement
denying the manner of the accident.
5. Before the Tribunal, the claimant himself examined as P.W.1, and an
eyewitness, Balasubramanian, was examined as P.W.2, and Karthik was
examined as P.W.3. Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. On the side of the respondent,
the driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1 and no document was marked.
Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 were marked.
__________
Page2 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
6. Upon appreciation of the evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal
held that the accident had occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving
of the bus driver. The claimant was referred to the Medical Board and the
Medical Board has issued Ex.C1/Disability Certificate, wherein, the disability
of the claimant was assessed at 30%. Hence, the Tribunal has taken the
disability of the claimant as 30% and by applying the ratio laid down by this
Court in the case of M.Chinnathambi vs. Deepa and other reported in 2020 (1)
TNMAC 617 , the Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of
disability and awarded a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head of permanent
disability and the following compensation was awarded under various heads :-
S.No. Heads of Compensation Amount awarded
by the Tribunal
1 Pain and suffering Rs.30,000/-
2 Loss of income Rs.30,000/-
3 Medical expenses Rs.2,59,120/-
4 Transportation charges Rs. 10,000/-
5 Extra nourishment Rs. 10,000/-
6 Attender charges Rs. 10,000/-
7 Damage to clothes Rs. 1,000/-
8 Loss of amenities Rs. 10,000/-
9 Permanent disability Rs.1,50,000/-
Total Rs.5,10,120/-
__________
Page3 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
7. Aggrieved over the same, the claimant has preferred the present appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant would submit
that the claimant sustained an open Type III B segmental fracture of both bones
of the left leg with skin loss, along with a crush laceration over the right ankle
exposing the muscles and tendon and other injures, considering the nature of the
injuries sustained and the treatment undergone, the Tribunal ought to have
awarded compensation by adopting multiplier method. However, the Tribunal
erred in awarding compensation for disability at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per
percentage without any contra evidence.
9. The learned counsel would further submit that the injuries sustained by
the claimant would result in a loss of earning capacity and that the Tribunal
erred in fixing his notional monthly income at Rs.10,000/- without properly
considering his contention that he was working as a site engineer and earning
Rs.35,000/- per month. The Tribunal also awarded inadequate compensation
under the heads of pain and suffering, extra nourishment, attendant charges and
loss of income during the treatment period.
10. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Transport
Corporation would submit that, in the absence of evidence establishing
__________
Page4 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
functional disability or loss of earning capacity, the Tribunal has rightly fixed
the income of the claimant and considering the nature of injuries, percentage
method was adopted and a sum of Rs.5,000/- for each percentage of disability
and there is no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal .
Though the claimant contended that he was working as a site engineer and
earning Rs.35,000/- per month, in the absence of proof of income , the Tribunal
rightly fixed his notional monthly income at Rs.10,000/- appears to be proper
and reasonable.
11. This Court has considered the submissions made on either side and
perused the materials available on record.
12. There is no dispute with regard to the manner of the accident or the
negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. It is to be noted
that the claimant appeared before the Medical Board, which assessed his
permanent disability at 30%. However, there is no evidence on record to
establish that the disability assessed by the Medical Board has resulted in
functional disability or a corresponding loss of earning capacity.
13. It is relevant to note that the Medical Board has not stated that the
injuries sustained by the claimant have resulted in any functional disability or
loss of earning capacity. In the absence of any evidence to establish functional
__________
Page5 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
disability or loss of earning capacity, it is relevant to refer to the judgment of the
Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in Reliance General Insurance Company
Limited v. M. Manoharan, reported in 2023 (1) TN MAC 348 (DB), wherein,
it has been held that when the Medical Board has not mentioned that the injuries
sustained by the claimant have resulted in functional disability or lost of
earning capacity and there is no other evidence to establish the same, the
Tribunal is justified in adopting the percentage method rather than the multiplier
method. In the present case, in the absence of any evidence establishing
functional disability or loss of earning capacity, this Court is of the view that the
Tribunal was justified in adopting the percentage method. Therefore, the
finding of the Tribunal in this regard does not warrant any interference.
14. As regards the claimant’s monthly income, he contended that he was
working as a site engineer and earning Rs.35,000/- per month. In support of his
claim, he relied upon Ex.P13, a letter addressed by the Office of Shanmugaa
Construction to the Manager, Karrur Vysha Bank, Palavakkam Branch, dated
05.02.2020. The claimant has also produced Ex.P11, a letter issued by his
employer, which indicates that he had been working as a site engineer since
March 2015 and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs.35,000/- as on
05.04.2015. However, Ex.P13, dated 05.02.2020, refers to a monthly salary of
Rs.29,600/-. Thus, there is a discrepancy between the two documents with
regard to the claimant’s monthly income. Further, Ex.P13 was issued
__________
Page6 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
subsequent to the accident. In view of the discrepancy between the documents
and the absence of any satisfactory explanation regarding the difference in the
salary amounts, the claimant’s monthly income requires to be assessed
appropriately.
15. In such circumstances, the notional monthly income of the claimant
fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.10,000/- appears to be meagre. Considering the fact
that the accident took place in the year 2016, this Court is inclined to enhance
the monthly income of the claimant from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. Further,
Ex.P3, the copy of Accident Register issued by Government Hospital, Attur,
Ex.P4, the Copy of Wound Certificate and Ex.P5/Discharge summary issued by
the Ganga Medical Centre and Hospital(P) Ltd., Coimbatore, reveal that the
claimant has sustained multiple injuries and was treated for an open type III B
segmental fracture both bones left leg with skin loss, crush laceration over right
ankle exposing muscles and tendon injuries. The medical records further
reveal that the claimant was admitted as an in-patient from 06.07.2016 to
13.07.2016 for eight days The Medical Board has assessed the disability of the
claimant as 30% and issued Ex.C1/Disability Certificate. Considering the year
of the accident, the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, and the
disability assessed by the Medical Board, this Court is inclined to award a sum
of Rs.15,000/- p.m. as loss of income for a period of six months. Accordingly,
a sum of Rs.90,000/- (Rs.15,000/- x 6 months) is awarded under the head of loss
__________
Page7 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
of income. A sum of Rs.30,000/- awarded under the head of “pain and
suffering” appears to be meagre and the same is enhanced to Rs.40,000/-.
Similarly, a sum Rs.10,000/- awarded under the head of extra nourishment is
also very meagre and the same is enhanced to Rs.25,000/- under this head. The
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads, namely, medical
expenses, Transportation charges, attender charges, damages to clothes and loss
of amenities appears to be just and reasonable.
16. In view of the foregoing discussion, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified and recalculated as follows:-
S.No. Heads of Compensation Amount awarded
by the Tribunal
1 Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/-
2 Loss of income Rs. 90,000/-
3 Medical expenses Rs. 2,59,120/-
4 Transportation charges Rs. 10,000/-
5 Extra nourishment Rs. 25,000/-
6 Attender charges Rs. 10,000/-
7 Damage to clothes Rs. 1,000/-
8 Loss of amenities Rs. 10,000/-
9 Permanent disability Rs.1,50,000/-
Total Rs.5,95,120/-
rounded off to
Rs.5,95,000/-
__________
Page8 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
17. In the result,
i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
ii) The compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal
by enhancing from Rs.5,10,120/- to Rs.5,95,000/ -
together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the
date of filing of claim petition till the date of
deposit (except the period of default, if any).
iii) The second respondent/ Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the entire award amount now
determined by this Court, (less the amount already
deposited if any) , within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment,
to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.2023 of 2019 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Special
Sub Court No.I, Salem.
iv) On such deposit being made, the appellant/claimant
is permitted to withdraw the same together with
interest and cost by filing necessary application
before the Tribunal.
v) The appellant/claimant is directed to pay the Court
fee, if required.
vi) The other directions issued by the Tribunal with
regard to the mode of payment of compensation
remains unaltered.
__________
Page9 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
vii) The manner and mode of disbursement of
compensation shall be as per the order of the
Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs.
28.10.2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
KKD
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
IV Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
__________
Page10 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )

CMA No. 2622 of 2024
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
KKD
CMA No.2622 of 2024
28-10-2026
__________
Page11 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 11:36:57 am )