C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
1.M.Radhika
2.Minor Manoj
3.Minor Sugeetha
4.Palaniammal ...Appellants in CMA.No.1008 of 2017
Minor Mounahari ...Appellant in CMA.No.1009 of 2017
Vs.
1.Thanga Kamalakannan
2.M/s.National Insurance Company Limited,
Divisional Office No.1, LRN Complex,
Saradha College Road,
Salem – 636 007. ..Respondents in both CMAs
Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 11.07.2016 made in MCOP.No.1942 of 2013 on the file of the Special District Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Salem.
For Appellants in both CMAs : Mr.K.Kuppusamy For Respondents in both CMAs : Mrs.Sree Vidya for R2 R1 - Exparte 1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 COMMON JUDGMENT The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.1008 of 2017 has been filed owing to the death of one Muthukumar, who aged 34 years old and the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and his widow and two minor children and also his mother. C.M.A.No.1009 of 2017 had been field by one of the minor child represented by mother, owing to injuries suffered.
2.The brief facts are that, on 22.07.2013 at around 8.00 p.m., near Angalamman Kovil in Trichy to Coimbatore main road on Palladam, when the deceased / Muthukumar was driving a motor cycle bearing registration number TN-42-D-1116, a Van bearing registration number TN-28-AY-7274, said to be driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motor cycle and caused an accident. It must also be mentioned that the said Muthukumar was riding along with his relative, Mounhari, who was the pillion rider. Due to the accident, Muthukumar suffered grevious injuries all over the body and was initially admitted in Government Hospital at Palladam and then, shifted to KG Hospital. He died on 03.07.2013. 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
3.Claiming that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Van bearing registration number TN-28-AY-7274, his legal representatives have filed M.C.O.P.No.1942 of 2013 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Salem, seeking compensation. For the injuries suffered, minor Mounahari represented by his mother, filed M.C.O.P.No.1946 of 2013 also before the very same Tribunal.
4.Both the petitions were taken up for consideration and a common judgment was passed on 11.07.2016. While determining the issues, the Tribunal had determined that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the aforementioned Van and in view of that categorical finding, let me not enter into any discussion on that particular aspect.
5.Mr.K.Kuppusamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants however urged that the compensation granted required revisitation. 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
6.A perusal of the judgment in M.C.O.P.No.1942 of 2013 shows that the Tribunal had taken into consideration, Exs.P12 and P13, which reflected that Muthukumar, was having a chappal shop and was doing business and Ex.P13 is actually a document, which reflected purchase of stock.
7.The Tribunal, in the absence of any of the documents relating to the income earned through such business and also in the failure to produce income tax assessment certificates with respect to the income of the deceased, proceeded to determine the monthly income at Rs.9,000/- per month. Since the deceased Muthukumar was aged 37 years, a multiplier of 15 was taken into consideration and after deducting ¼th towards his pesonal expenses and retaining ¾th towards contribution to the family, determined the loss of income at Rs.12,15,000/-. There were compensations granted under other heads, which were not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellants.
4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
8.With respect to the income, let me reexamine the particular reasoning given by the Tribunal and as a matter of fact Exs.P12 and P13 establish the fact that the deceased was doing business in purchase and sale of slippers, which might earn reasonable income and therefore, I would fix the monthly income at Rs.10,000/- per month. One particular aspect, which had not been taken into consideration is the future prospects at 40% and after taken into consideration ¼th towards personal expenses, the monthly income would be Rs.11,500/- per month. The total loss of income would be (11,500 X 12 X 15) = Rs.20,70,000/-. The final compensation granted is as follows:
Heads Amounts
Loss of future income Rs.20,70,000/-
(11,500 X 12 X 15)
Loss of love and affection for the petitioners 2 and 3 Rs.1,00,000/-
Loss of consortium Rs.40,000/-
Loss of love and affection for the 4th petitioner Rs.10,000/-
Medical Bills as per Ex.P8 Rs.70,095/-
Funeral Expenses Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.23,15,095/-
5/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017
9.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to that extent enhancing the compensation which had been determined as Rs.14,60,095/- to Rs.23,15,095/-. The Insurance company shall deposit the difference in compensation amount i.e., Rs.8,55,000/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The ratio of compensation amount apportioned between the claimants as ordered by the Tribunal will remain the same. On such deposit, the appellant 1 and 4 are entitled to withdraw the amount. Since the appellants 2 and 3 were aged 15 and 10 years in the year when the claim petition is filed, now, they might have become major. On obtaining necessary orders from the Tribunal, they are permitted to withdraw the compensation amount payable to them.
10.In so far as C.M.A.No.1009 of 2017 is concerned, the Tribunal had granted Rs.2,23,415/- for the injuries suffered to the minor and had determined a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards future income and determined Rs.2,000/- per percentage for 35% diability. The same would require interference, I would grant a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for 35% 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 disability, which would be Rs.1,05,000/-. The compensation granted under the other heads remain same. The compensation granted is modified as follows:-
Heads Amount
Loss of future income Rs.1,05,000/-
At Rs.3,000/- per pecentage of disability (3,000 x 35) Attender charges Rs.5,000/-
Transport expenses Rs.6,300/-
Expenses for X-ray as per Ex.P22 Rs.900/-
Extra nourishment Rs.10,000/-
Medical expenses as per bills Rs.1,31,215/-
Total Rs.2,58,415/-
11.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to that extent enhancing the compensation which had been determined as Rs.2,23,415/- to Rs.2,58,415/-. The Insurance company shall deposit the difference in compensation amount i.e., Rs.35,000/- with interest at 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till the date of deposit within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The compensation amount of Rs.1,00,000/- should be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 until the claimant becomes major. The mother is permitted to withdraw the interest once in three months. The remaining amount can be withdrawn, by his mother on filing application before the Tribunal.
12.With the above observations, both the appeals are allowed. No order as to costs.
01.03.2022 kkn Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order 8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 To-
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Salem.
9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
KKN C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017 01.03.2022 10/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis