Madras High Court
Royal Sundaram Alliance ... vs Sangeetha on 21 April, 2021
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 21.04.2021
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
and
C.M.P.No.4344 of 2020
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Represented by its Branch Manager,
No.186/5, 3rd Floor,
"Royal Tower", New Bus Stand Road,
Meyyanur, Salem-636 004. .. Appellant
Vs.
1. Sangeetha, W/o Basuvan
2.Minor Abisanth, S/o Basuvan
3.Minor Arjun, S/o Basuvan
4. Bakiyam, W/o Muniyappan
5. R.Anandhan, S/o Radhakrishnan .. Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the order and decree dated 06.08.2019 passed in
M.C.O.P.No.93 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases), Krishnagiri.
For appellant : Mr.G.Vasudevan
For respondents: Mr.C.Prabakaran for RR-1 to 4
R-5 set ex-parte before the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.1/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Subbiah, J)
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the
Award dated 06.08.2019 passed in M.C.O.P.No.93 of 2018 on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Special District Court for Motor Accident
Claims Cases), Krishnagiri.
2. The respondents 1 to 4 are the claimants before the Tribunal.
They are the wife, two minor children and the mother of the deceased
Basuvan. According to the claimants, on 16.06.2016 at about 17 hours, when
the deceased was driving the lorry bearing Registration No.TN-29-AR-3213
on Dhule-Surat Highway road, he happened to negotiate a slope region of
Kodaiebari Ghat. At that time, an unknown lorry which was proceeding in
front of the lorry of the deceased, suddenly moved towards the left side of the
road. On seeing the unknown lorry coming on the left side of the road, to
avoid the accident, the deceased moved his lorry towards left side. In that
process, the lorry toppled on the side of the road, resulting in the deceased
sustaining fatal injuries and he died on the spot itself. Hence, the legal heirs of
the deceased Baswan have made a claim for a sum of Rs.40 lakhs as
compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.2/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
3. The Claim Petition filed by the legal heirs of the deceased was
resisted by the appellant-Insurance Company by filing counter statement
stating that the accident had occurred only due to the sole negligence on the
part of the deceased himself and he is not a third party to the insured vehicle.
Hence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation amount
and prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
4. In order to prove the claim, on the side of the claimants, the wife
of the deceased was examined as P.W.1 and the eye-witness to the occurrence
was examined as P.W.2 and Exs.P-1 to P-13 were marked. On the side of the
Insurance Company, neither any witness was examined nor document was
marked.
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record, came to the
conclusion that the accident had occurred only as narrated by the claimants in
the Claim Petition. By coming to such a conclusion, the Tribunal has passed an
award for a sum of Rs.23,43,719/- and the break-up details of the amounts
awarded by the Tribunal are as follows:
Sl.No. Heads under which the amounts are Amounts awarded (in
awarded by the Tribunal Rs).
1 Loss of dependency 22,17,600
2 Loss of consortium 25,000
3 Loss of estate 20,000
4 Funeral expenses 15,000
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.3/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
Sl.No. Heads under which the amounts are Amounts awarded (in
awarded by the Tribunal Rs).
5 Love and affection 25,000
6 Transportation charges 40,919
Total 23,43,719
The above compensation amount was awarded with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from
the date of claim petition till the date of deposit. Challenging the same, the
Insurance Company has preferred this appeal.
6. Now, the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company
contending that the accident had occurred only due to the own negligence of
the driver of the insured /deceased who was driving the lorry. Though it has
been stated in the Claim Petition that the accident had occurred due to the
negligent act committed by the unknown vehicle which was going in front of
the lorry, which was driven by the deceased, except the evidence of P.W.2
who was stated to be the eye-witness to the accident, who had also travelled in
the lorry, no other independent witness was examined. In the absence of any
other witness to corroborate the evidence of PW2, the Tribunal ought not to
have relied on the testimony of PW2. Thus, the learned counsel for the
appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the accident had occurred due to
the own negligence on the part of the deceased. Moreover, the driver of the
lorry is not third party to the insured vehicle. Therefore, the Insurance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.4/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
Company is not liable to pay the compensation amount and the learned
counsel prayed for setting aside the impugned Award passed by the Tribunal.
7. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants made
his submissions supporting the impugned Award passed by the Tribunal.
8. Keeping in mind the submissions made on either side, we have
carefully perused the entire materials available on record.
9. We find that it is the specific case of the appellant/Insurance
Company that when the deceased was driving his lorry in the slope region, he
had moved the vehicle to his left side in order to avoid hitting of unknown
vehicle which was moving in front of the lorry driven by the deceased and in
that process, the accident had occurred resulting in the death of the deceased.
From the manner of the accident as could be projected by the appellant, it can
be easily inferred that there is negligence on the part of the deceased also.
Further, the accident had occurred due to the own negligence of the deceased
himself. At the same time, we are of the opinion that the accident had
occurred during the course of employment of the deceased. Therefore, instead
of awarding compensation to the claimants under the Motor Vehicles Act,
compensation has to be awarded by treating it as an accidental death during
the course of employment of the deceased. Accordingly, the award passed by
the Tribunal is modified and compensation could be awarded as per the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.5/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
provisions of the Employees' Compensation Act (formerly, Workmen's
Compensation Act). If calculation is so made as per the Employees'
Compensation Act, the compensation is worked out as follows:
Age of the deceased at the time of accident: 31 years
Income : Rs.8,000/- per month
Factor : 205.95
sub-total (8000 x 205.95 x 50%)
(personal expenses deducted at 50%) : Rs.8,23,800/-
Funeral expenses (added) : Rs.5,000/-
------------------
Total compensation Rs.8,28,800/-
===========
with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of accident till the date of deposit.
10. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the claimants are eligible
only for compensation of Rs.8,28,800/- calculated as per the provisions of the
Employees' Compensation Act.
11. Accordingly, the amount of compensation calculated by the
Tribunal by applying the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, is set aside and
the compensation is now awarded as above as per the Employees'
Compensation Act at Rs.8,28,800/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of
accident till the date of deposit.
12. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
compensation amount which we have determined in this appeal within a period
of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.6/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
adjusting the amount already deposited by them and the excess amount, if any
lying in deposit, shall be refunded to the appellant/Insurance Company. On
such deposit by the appellant/Insurance Company, the respondents 1 and
4/claimants 1 and 4 are entitled to withdraw their respective shares before the
Tribunal in accordance with law. As far as the share of the minor claimants 2
and 3 (respondents 2 and 3 herein) are concerned, their share shall be
deposited in any fixed deposit scheme till they attain majority and the interest
accrued thereon shall be withdrawn by the first claimant/mother once in three
months.
13. With the above calculation so made under the Employees'
Compensation Act and the directions issued, the appeal is partly allowed. No
costs. Consequently, C.M.P. is closed.
(R.P.S.J.) ( S.K.J)
21.04.2021
Index: Yes
Speaking Order: Yes
cs
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
(Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases), Krishnagiri.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.7/8
Judgment dated 21.04.2021 in
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
R.SUBBIAH, J
and
S.KANNAMMAL, J
cs
C.M.A.No.712 of 2020
21.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No.8/8
