C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
and
Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021
C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited,
Villupuram Division III,
No.3/137, Salamedu,
Villupuram – 605 602. ... Appellant
Vs
1.S.Samundeeswari
2.S.Ramya ... Respondents
Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021 in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
1.S.Samundeeswari
2.S.Ramya ... Cross Objectors Vs 1/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Villupuram Division III, No.3/137, Salamedu, Villupuram – 605 602. ... Respondent Prayer in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the fair and decreetal order dated 21.03.2011 passed in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2008 by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai.
Prayer in Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021: Cross Objection filed under Order 41 Rule 22 of the Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and Decree order dated 21.03.2011 in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2008 on the file of the Addl. District Court, Fast Track Court I, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Chennai.
For Appellant in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 & Respondent in Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021 : Mr.S.S.Swaminathan For Respondents in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 & Cross Objectors in : M/s.Ramya V.Rao Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021 2/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 COMMON JUDGEMENT The Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2008 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Chennai.
2.The facts in brief are herein below narrated and the parties are referred to in the same rank as before the Tribunal.
3.The petitioners, who are the wife and daughter of one R.Sridharan has filed the above claim petition seeking compensation for his death in a road accident on 04.09.2007. It is their case that the said Sridharan was working as a Site Supervisor with M/s.Prashad Amstrong Yen G.E.C. (P) Ltd., and aged about 44 years at the time of his death. On 04.09.2007, at about 14.50 hrs, when the deceased Sridharan was proceeding on his cycle from West to East direction on EVR Salai and when he was taking a turn towards north to enter 3rd Avenue Salai, Anna Arch signal, a water tanker lorry bearing Registration No.TML 8778 belonging to the 3/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 respondent/Transport Corporation was driven in a rash and negligent manner and at a dangerous speed. The said vehicle was proceeding in the same direction as the deceased and had hit the deceased from behind, as a result of which, he had sustained fatal injuries. The petitioners had claimed a total compensation of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-.
4.The respondent/Transport Corporation had filed a counter, in which, they would submit that when the driver of the water tanker lorry has turned his vehicle to enter the water filling up station, a cycle coming in the same direction without noticing the lorry turning to the left dashed against the lorry's rear wheel. As a result of which, he had fallen down and sustained injuries. He was admitted to the Government Hospital at Kilpauk. It is their contention that the accident had occurred only on account of the negligence of the deceased Sridharan.
5.The Tribunal below by its award, dated 21.03.2011 held that the accident had occurred only on account of the negligence of the driver of the 4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 respondent/Transport Corporation's lorry. Thereafter, the Tribunal proceeded to arrive at a compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-, which is payable to the petitioners.
6.The Transport Corporation has filed the appeal in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 seeking to set aside the award on the ground that it was excessive and the Tribunal ought to have fixed contributory negligence on the deceased as well.
7.The Transport Corporation has also challenged the salary certificate, which has been marked as Ex.P6 on the ground that the same has not been marked through the appropriate witness. After receiving notice in this appeal, the petitioners have entered appearance and have filed a cross objection seeking an enhancement of the compensation.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the Cross Objectors would submit that Ex.P6, salary certificate would show that the gross salary of the 5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 deceased was a sum of Rs.5,800/-, whereas the same has been rejected by the Tribunal below and the Tribunal has arrived at a notional income of Rs.5,000/- taking into account, the monthly income as claimed in the claim petition by the petitioners.
9.She would further submit that the Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head of future prospects. Considering the age, 40% has to be added towards the future prospects. That apart, the amounts under the conventional heads viz., loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, funeral expenses and loss of estate have also to be enhanced. She would contend that a sum of Rs.30,000/- has been granted towards loss of consortium, the same has to be enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. Likewise, the amounts granted jointly under the head of funeral and transport expenses at Rs.10,000/- has to be enhanced to a sum of Rs.15,000/- for transport expenses and another sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. 6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
10.Heard the learned counsels on both side and perused the materials available on record.
11.Admittedly, Ex.P6, salary certificate would show the gross salary at Rs.5,800/-. This document has been marked through the employer. The person, who had deposed and through whom the document is marked is the Managing Director. The document has been marked through authorised representative. Therefore, the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant in this regard has to be countenanced.
12.The deceased was aged about 44 years at the time of his death. Future prospects have not been considered by the Tribunal. Therefore, 10% has to be adopted towards future prospects. Therefore, the monthly income would be a sum of Rs.6,380/- (i.e., Rs.5,800/- + Rs.580/-) and the annual income would work out to a sum of Rs.76,560/-. Out of this, 1/3 rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Therefore, the contribution to the family would be a sum of Rs.51,040/-. The appropriate multiplier in the case 7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 of the deceased is 13. Therefore, the loss of dependency would work out to a sum of Rs.6,63,520/-, which is worked out as follows :-
Loss of Income Amount in Rs.
Notional income (Per month) 5,800
Add: Future Prospects (Rs.5,800/- x 10%) (Per month) 580
6,380
Notional income (Per annum) (Rs.6,380/- x 12) 76,560
Less: Personal expenses (1/3rd) (Rs.76,560/- x 1/3rd) 25,520
51,040
Multiplier 13
Loss of income (Rs.51,040 x 13) 6,63,520
Total 6,63,520
13.A sum of Rs.30,000/- has been granted under the head of loss of consortium, which stands enhanced to a sum of Rs.40,000/-. A sum of Rs.10,000/- has been granted under the heads of funeral and transport expenses, which is enhanced to a sum of Rs.15,000/-. Further, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head of loss of estate. Therefore, the total compensation payable to the respondents is Rs.7,73,520/-, which is worked out as follows:
8/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.690 of 2013
Heads Awarded by Awarded by
the Tribunal this Court
(Amount in (Amount in
Rs.) Rs.)
Loss of income 5,20,000 6,63,520
(enhanced)
Funeral and transport expenses 10,000 15,000
(enhanced)
Loss of consortium 30,000 40,000
(enhanced)
Loss of love and affection 40,000 40,000
Loss of estate - 15,000
Total 6,00,000 7,73,520
14.In the result, the appeal filed by the Transport Corporation in C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the claimants in Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021 is allowed.
15.The Award of the Tribunal is modified, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.6,00,000/- to Rs.7,73,520/-. The Appellant- Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the said amount to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.58 of 2008 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum 9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The said amount shall be apportioned amongst the claimants as per the Award of the Tribunal. On such deposit being made, the respondents/claimants are permitted to withdraw the award amount falling to their share, along with proportionate accrued interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already withdrawn, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal. The respondents/claimants are directed to pay the Court fee for the enhanced compensation amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not disburse the enhanced amount till such time as the certified copy showing proof of payment of Court fee has been produced by the respondents/claimants. In other respects, the Award of the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. There shall be no order as to costs in the present appeal.
08.09.2022 Index : Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order sp 10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 To
1.The MACT (Spl. District Judge) at Salem.
2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. 11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 P.T.ASHA, J., sp C.M.A.No.690 of 2013 and Cros.Obj.No.28 of 2021 08.09.2022 12/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis