B.Nagarajan vs M.Natarajan, & Anr.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the claimant.

The claimant was riding his bicycle on 08.04.2009, when the lorry belonging to the first respondent hit him from behind and causing him very serious injuries. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.7,25,000/- with interest, even though, the claimant claimed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-.

The learned counsel for the claimant pointed out that the claimant suffered compound fractures on the femur region and that he suffered crush injury on the right thigh. His urinary bladder has been ruptured. He underwent as many as five surgeries. He was hardly 14 years old when the accident took place.

After the appeal was listed for final hearing, I called upon the claimant to appear in person before me. On a direction from the Court, the claimant filed an affidavit setting out his current condition. The claimant was frail and pathetic looking. He has stated that on account of the injury sustained by him, he is constrained to bear an indwelling catheter which has to be changed once in three weeks. He has not been able to pursue his future studies. His disability was assessed as 80% partial and permanent. He has also stated that his marital future is also doomed. He requires further surgery in order to set right his left hip joint. The screw fixed on the left leg continues to remain. He is still under medication. He has been advised by the doctors to undergo surgery for urology issues. The accident took place in the year 2009. Even after eight years, the condition of the claimant has not really improved.

I am therefore of the view that the claim petition filed by the appellant herein ought to have been allowed as prayed for. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would place reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2013 (2) TN MAC 338 (SC) (Master Mallikarjun Vs. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited & Another). The Honourable Supreme Court has made it clear that if permanent disability is above 60% and upto 90% in case of children, Rs.5,00,000/- should be awarded. It does not mean that that the damages awarded to the claimant should be only Rs.5,00,000/- and not more. As indicated above, the marital prospects of the claimant have been virtually doomed. He continues to be under treatment. He continues to bear an indwelling catheter even after eight years of accident. He may have to undergo at least two more surgeries. Therefore, the yardstick that is applicable in this case to ascertain the quantum of damages will have to be necessarily different. I therefore hold that the quantum of compensation payable to the claimant is Rs. 10,00,000/- as claimed by him, in his claim petition. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.7,25,000/-. The second respondent / Insurance Company is further directed to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,75,000/- as awarded by this Court together with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition and till the date of realization along with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The second respondent shall deposit the said amount within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.1236 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal, Principal Sub-court, Madurai. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same by filing proper application before the Tribunal.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed as indicated above. No costs.