CMA(MD)/998/2024 of M/s.United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Estherleen on 2 November 2026

J U D G M E N T

The second respondent/Insurance Company in M.C.O.P.No.9 of 2022, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, has preferred the present appeal, challenging the award dated 21.04.2023, passed in M.C.O.P. No.9 of 2022.

2. Facts of the case:

2.1. The claimant filed the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. It is the case of the claimant that on 21.10.2021, at about 10.30 a.m., while she was riding the two-wheeler belonging to the first respondent from south to north towards Tiruchirappalli Court, she suddenly applied the brake in order to avoid hitting a vehicle proceeding ahead of her. Consequently, she lost control of the vehicle and fell down, sustaining injuries to her left leg and left shoulder. She was admitted in the hospital and underwent several surgeries. Hence, she filed the claim petition seeking compensation.

2.2. The Insurance Company disputed its liability, the maintainability of the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the quantum of compensation claimed.

2.3. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined herself as P.W.1 and

marked Exs.P1 to P12, besides marking Ex.C1, the disability certificate. On the side of the Insurance Company, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.R1 and R2 were marked.

3. Findings of the Tribunal:

3.1. Upon considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal fixed the liability upon the Insurance Company and awarded a sum of Rs.4,23,056/- as compensation, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition. S.No. Heads Amount in Rs.

1. Disability Compensation 75,000/-

2. Loss of Future Earning Capacity / Future Income 75,000/-

3. Pain and Sufferings 70,000/-

4. Loss of Income 18,000/-

5. Extra Nourishment 25,000/-

6. Attender Charges 20,000/-

7. Medical Expenses 1,15,056/-

8. Transportation Charges 20,000/-

9. Damage to Clothes and other valuables 5,000/- Total Award Amount 4,23,056/-

3.2. Challenging the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal.

4. Submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant:

4.1. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the claimant herself had fallen from the vehicle and, therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation. It was further contended that the claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is not maintainable and that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is contrary to the structured formula prescribed under Section 163-A.

5. Submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents:

5.1. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that the mere fact that the claim petition was filed under Section 163-A cannot be a ground to deny or reduce the compensation to which the claimant is otherwise entitled. It was further submitted that the claimant was not the owner of the vehicle and that the first respondent was the owner thereof. Since a package policy had been taken, the Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the claimant under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. This Court has considered the submissions made on either side and

perused the materials available on record.

7. The following points arise for consideration is whether the claim petition filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is maintainable and whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.4,23,056/- is legally sustainable under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act?

8. Discussion and findings:

8.1. Admittedly, the claimant was not the owner of the vehicle and she is not a tortfeasor. The vehicle was owned by the first respondent and was covered by a package policy issued by the Insurance Company. Therefore, the claim petition filed by the claimant under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act is maintainable.

8.2. However, the compensation payable under Section 163-A has to be determined in accordance with the structured formula applicable to the injury sustained by the claimant. As per the structured formula applicable to an injury claim under Section 163-A, the claimant is entitled to compensation based on the percentage of disability, together with maximum of Rs.15,000/- towards medical expenditure and Rs.5000/- under the pain and suffering . In the present case, the Tribunal has awarded compensation under various heads beyond the amounts permissible under the structured formula under Section 163-A. The

Tribunal erroneously calculated the amount as if it is filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act. The claimant suffered 5% disability. Accordingly, taking the prescribed amount of Rs.10,000/- per percentage of disability, the claimant is entitled to Rs.50,000/- towards permanent disability. She is further entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.5,000/- (5 x 10000) towards pain and suffering. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.70,000/- with interest 7.5% from the dated of the filing the petition in M.C.O.P.No.9 of 2022, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IV Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

9. Result:

9.1. Accordingly, this C.M.A.(MD).No.998 of 2024 is partly allowed.

9.2. The award dated 21.04.2023 made in M.C.O.P.No.9 of 2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Additional Sub Court), Trichy is modified and the compensation is reduced from Rs.4,23,056/- to Rs.70,000/-,together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition.

9.3. The appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the reduced award amount of Rs.70,000/-, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, if not already deposited, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

9.4. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the same, in accordance with law.

9.5. If the Insurance Company has already deposited any amount in excess of the modified award amount, it is permitted to withdraw the excess amount.

There shall be no order as to costs.

10. 02.11.2026 NCC :Yes/No

Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No aas To

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (III Additional Sub Court) Trichy District.

2. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J. aas