THE BRANCH MANAGER, vs AJANTHAR,

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved On 24.09.2026
Pronounced On .2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
{CNR: HCMD011082642018}
Case QR
The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Co Ltd.,
North Car Sreet., Anguvilas Buiding,
Nagercoil. ...Appellant(s)
Vs
1.Ajanthar,
2.Puela Prakash ...Respondent(s)
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988, to Set aside the Judgment and decree passed by the Motor
Accident claims Tribunal cum Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli made in
MCOP.No.45/2013 dated 20.04.2018 and allow this appeal with costs.

For Appellant : Mr.A.S.Mathialagan
For Respondents : No appearance for R2
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
JUDGEMENT
The second respondent in M.C.O.P. No.45 of 2013, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Sub Judge, has filed the present
C.M.A. No.626 of 2019, challenging the award passed in the said claim
petition.
2.Facts of the case:
2.1.According to the claimant, on 11.10.2012 at about 6.30 a.m., while he
was riding his two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN-75-HW-278 on the
Thiruvananthapuram–Nagercoil Main Road, the offending bus bearing
Registration No. TN-75-7375, insured with the appellant-Insurance Company,
was driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his two-wheeler.
2.2.In the accident, the claimant sustained multiple injuries. He was
admitted in the hospital on 11.10.2012 and continued treatment up to
19.10.2012. Thereafter, he was periodically admitted for further treatment.
According to the claimant, he sustained injuries to his left leg, left tibia, left
ankle, left hand, left thumb and little finger and underwent various procedures
and surgeries. He therefore filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.
7,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the claim
petition.
2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
2.3.The appellant-Insurance Company filed its counter disputing the
manner of the accident and the negligence attributed to the driver of the
offending vehicle. The quantum of compensation claimed was also disputed.
2.4.Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked
Exs.P1 to P18. The First Information Report was also placed before the
Tribunal.
3.Findings of the Tribunal:
3.1.Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the
Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving
of the driver of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of Rs.5,50,112/- as
compensation.
Sl.No. Heads Amounts in Rs.
1 Loss of Dependency 60,000/-
2 Pain and Sufferings 1,00,000/-
3 Loss of Amenities 1,00,000/-
4 Attendant Charges 50,000/-
5 Loss of Income during and after the
treatment
70,000/-
6 Transportation Expenses 82,500/-
7 Amount as per MCOP 87,612/-
Total Compensation Awarded Rs.5,50,112/-
3.2.Aggrieved by the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred
the present appeal.
3/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
4.Submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant:
4.1.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company
submitted that the Tribunal had awarded an excessive sum of Rs.60,000/-
towards permanent disability. According to the learned counsel, the disability
certificate assessed only 3% permanent disability, and therefore the Tribunal
ought not to have awarded Rs.60,000/- under that head.
4.2.It was further submitted that, in terms of the principles followed by
this Court for assessing compensation for percentage of permanent disability in
cases where the disability does not result in a corresponding loss of earning
capacity, the claimant would be entitled only to the amount applicable to 3%
disability. The learned counsel therefore sought reduction of the compensation.
5.Notice had been served on the claimant. However, there was no
representation on his behalf before this Court.
6.This Court has considered the submissions and perused the records.
7.Discussion on negligence:
7.1.The finding regarding negligence does not warrant interference. The
Insurance Company has not produced any contra evidence sufficient to displace
the finding of the Tribunal. In any event, the evidence of the injured claimant,
the FIR and the other materials on record establish that the accident occurred
due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle.
7.2.Accordingly, the finding of the Tribunal fixing negligence on the
4/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
driver of the offending vehicle is confirmed.
8.Discussion and Findings:
8.1.The principal challenge in the present appeal is with regard to the
amount awarded towards permanent disability. Ex.P14 disability certificate
assesses the permanent disability suffered by the claimant at 3%. The Tribunal,
however, has awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards permanent disability.
8.2.The claimant had admittedly sustained multiple injuries, including
injuries to the left leg, left tibia, left ankle, left hand, thumb and little finger.
The records also disclose that he underwent treatment and various surgical
procedures and was periodically admitted to the hospital. The compensation
awarded under the other heads therefore does not warrant interference.
8.3.However, when the disability certificate assesses the permanent
disability at only 3%, the amount awarded under the head of permanent
disability requires modification. Having regard to the extent of disability and
the prevailing assessment adopted for percentage disability, this Court is of the
view that a sum of Rs.10,000/- would be reasonable towards 3% permanent
disability.
8.4.Accordingly, the amount of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
under the head of permanent disability is reduced to Rs.10,000/-. Thus, there is
a reduction of Rs.50,000/- under this head.
8.5.Except for the above modification, this Court finds no infirmity in the
5/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
compensation awarded towards the other heads. Considering the multiple
injuries sustained by the claimant, the periodical hospitalisation, the injuries to
the left leg and tibia, left ankle, left hand, thumb and little finger, and the
surgeries undergone by him, the amounts awarded under the remaining heads
are confirmed.
9.Conclusion:
9.1.For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
to the claimant is re-determined as follows:-
Award in
Rs.Amount
awarded by
the Tribunal
Re-quantified
Sl.
Heads
No
amount by
Status
this Court
1 Permanent Disability 60,000/- 10,000/- Reduced
2 Pain and Sufferings 1,00,000/- 1,00,000/- Confirmed
3 Loss of Amenities 1,00,000/- 1,00,000/- Confirmed
4 Attendant Charges 50,000/- 50,000/- Confirmed
5 Loss of Income during
and after the treatment
70,000/- 70,000/- Confirmed
6 Transportation Expenses 82,500/- 82,500/- Confirmed
7 Amount as per MCOP 87,612/- 87,612/- Confirmed
Total Rs.5,50,112/- Rs.5,00,112/- Reduced
10.Result:
10.1.In the result, the C.M.A. No.626 of 2019 is partly allowed. The
finding regarding negligence is confirmed.
10.2.The award dated 20.04.2018 in M.C.O.P.No.45 of 2013 on the file
6/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court, Tirunelveli is
reduced from Rs.5,50,112/- to Rs.5,00,112/- , together with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition.
10.3.The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the reduced
award amount of Rs.5,00,112/-, together with interest at the rate awarded by the
Tribunal from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit, after giving
credit to the amount, if any, already deposited, within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
10.4.On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount in
accordance with the order of the Tribunal. If any excess amount has already
been deposited by the Insurance Company, the appellant is at liberty to
withdraw the excess amount.
There shall be no order as to costs.
.09.2026
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
AKM
7/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special Sub Court,
Tirunelveli,

2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
8/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )

CMA(MD) NO. 626 of 2019
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
AKM
C.M.A.(MD).No.626 of 2019
Dated: .09.2026
9/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 04:06:13 pm )