S.M. GEETHA Vs. G. AMBIRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the quantum of compensation, this appeal has been filed by the claimants.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the Tribunal has erred in disallowing the medical expenses of Rs.1,22,052.0093/- incurred during the second admission of the deceased in Apollo Hospital and the deceased was continuously under treatment even after discharge from the hospital on 10/11/2009. He further contended that the Tribunal failed to consider that the second admission of the deceased at Apollo Hospital, Madurai, was due to severe fever associated with erythmatous rashses (bed-sore) which are the consequences of continuous treatment for the injuries suffered in the accident. Learned counsel for the appellants further contended that the Tribunal has erred in adopting split multiplier for computing loss of income which is erroneous. In support of the above contentions, the learned counsel relied on the following decisions:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent would rely on the judgments in R. Leelavaty v. Sheik Dawood and another reported in 2013 (2) TN MAC 113 (DB) and Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., v. M. Arulmozhi reported in 2014 (1) TNMAC 334 (DB) and contended that the Tribunal ought not to have granted a sum of Rs.1,92,492.00 to the claimants towards the loss of income for 6 months left over service period.