Madras High Court
Yasmeen vs R.Loganathan on 23 April, 2021
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
1.Yasmeen
2.M.Shereen Farhana (minor)
Represented by 1st petitioner mother and N.F.
3.M.Gulnar Bagum
4.A.Mohamed Ali ...Appellants
Vs
1.R.Loganathan
(Remained ex-parte before the Trial Court)
2.United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.70, N.S.C., Bose Road, 3rd Floor,
Chennai – 600 079. ...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 23.03.2016
MACT.O.P.No.1559 of 2010 on the file of the Special Sub Judge-I, (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal), Chennai.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Kalai Arasan
For Respondents : R1 – Exparte before Tribunal
Mr.P.Sankara Narayanan for R2
1/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking for enhancement of
compensation under the impugned Award dated 23.03.2016 passed by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Judge-I to deal with MCOP
Cases, Chennai in MCOP.No.1559 of 2010.
2.The Tribunal under the impugned Award directed the second
respondent Insurance Company to pay the Appellants/claimants a compensation
of Rs.15,32,500/- as detailed hereunder:
Particulars Award Amount
Loss of financial dependency to the Rs.11,47,500
family
Compensation for consortium to 1st Rs.1,00,000
petitioner
Loss of love and affection to 2nd Rs.1,00,000
petitioner
Loss of love and affection to 3rd and Rs.1,50,000
4th petitioners (Rs.75,000/- each to
petitioners 3 and 4)
Funeral and Ritual expenses Rs.25,000
Loss of estate Rs.10,000
Total Rs.15,32,500
3.The Appellants/claimants unsatisfied with the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal have preferred this appeal seeking for
enhancement.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
4.Heard Mr.R.Kalai Arasan, learned counsel for the Appellants and
Mr.P.Sankara Narayanan, learned counsel for the second respondent. The
first respondent has remained exparte both before the Tribunal as well as
this Court.
5.This Court has perused and examined the impugned Award as well
as materials and evidence available on record before the Tribunal.
6.The deceased Samsudeen was aged 26 years at the time of the
accident. The deceased was working as a Sales Executive with
M/s.Manasarovar Automobiles, Chennai – 42 and his salary certificate was
marked as Ex.P6 before the Tribunal. PW3, who is an Officer with
M/s.Manasarovar Automobiles, the employer of the deceased has confirmed
that Ex.P6 (salary certificate) is a genuine document and that the deceased
was earning Rs.12,500/- per month at the time of the accident. However,
the Tribunal fixed the monthly income of the deceased only at Rs.5,000/-.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
7.The deceased was an employee of M/s.Manasarovar Automobiles
only few days prior to the date of the accident as seen from the evidence
available on record. Hence, the Appellants/claimants cannot seek for a
direction to fix the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.12,500/-.
However, this Court is of the considered view that the monthly income of the
deceased fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.5,000/- is too low which has to be
necessarily enhanced in view of nature of the avocation of the deceased who
was a Sales Executive with M/s.Manasarovar Automobiles, Chennai – 42
and was earning Rs.12,500/- per month at the time of the accident.
8.This Court after giving due consideration to the nature of avocation
of the deceased and his salary certificate which has been marked as Ex.P6
and period of his employment with M/s.Manasarovar Automobiles is of the
considered view that his monthly income will have to be fixed at Rs.10,000/-
instead of Rs.5,000/- fixed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, this Court fixes
the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
9.The Tribunal under the impugned Award has granted 50% to the
Appellants\claimants towards loss of future prospects. Since the deceased
Samsudeen was not a permanent employee of Manasarovar Automobiles,
50% loss of future prospects ought not to have been awarded by the
Tribunal. In accordance with the settled law, whenever the deceased is not
in permanent employment, the loss of future prospects will have to be fixed
only at 40% and not at 50%. Hence, the same is modified by this Court and
the loss of future prospects is fixed at 40% instead of 50% fixed by the
Tribunal.
10.The Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th towards the personal
expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal has rightly adopted the correct
multiplier of 17, since the deceased was 26 years at the time of the accident.
However, in view of enhancement of the monthly income of the deceased
from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.10,000/- and the reduction of loss of future prospects
from 50% to 40%, the loss of pecuniary benefits and loss of estate to the
deceased is enhanced from Rs.11,47,500/- fixed by the Tribunal to
Rs.21,42,000/- (Rs.10,000/- +40% = Rs.14,000 – 1/4 = Rs.10,500 x 12 x
17) by this Court.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
11.The Tribunal has erroneously awarded a higher compensation of
Rs.2,50,000/- towards loss of love and affection which is not in accordance
with the settled law. The first Appellant is the wife of the deceased; 2 nd
Appellant is the minor daughter of the deceased; and the 3rd & 4th Appellants
are the parents of the deceased. The compensation towards loss of love and
affection is therefore reduced from Rs.2,50,000/- to Rs.1,20,000/-.
(calculated at Rs.40,000/- each to the Appellants/claimants 2, 3 and 4).
12.The Tribunal has also erroneously awarded a higher compensation
towards loss of consortium to the first Appellant, who is the wife of the
deceased at Rs.1,00,000/-. The same will have to be reduced to Rs.40,000/-
by this Court as per the settled law. Accordingly, the same is reduced to
Rs.40,000/-.
13.The Tribunal has also awarded a higher compensation towards
funeral expenses at Rs.25,000/- which is in not accordance with the settled
law. As per the settled law, the maximum compensation payable towards
funeral expenses is Rs.15,000/-. Accordingly, this Court reduces the
compensation towards funeral expenses from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.15,000/-.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
14.The Tribunal has also awarded a lesser compensation towards loss
of estate of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- which has to be enhanced to
Rs.15,000/- in accordance with the settled law. Accordingly, this Court
enhances the compensation towards loss of estate to Rs.15,000/- from
Rs.10,000/-.
15.For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.15,32,000/- to Rs.23,32,000/- by this Court as
detailed hereunder:
Particulars Award Enhanced /
Amount modified amount
Loss of financial Rs.11,47,500 Rs.21,42,000
dependency to the
family
Compensation for Rs.1,00,000 Rs.40,000
consortium to 1st
petitioner
Loss of love and Rs.1,00,000 -
affection to 2nd
petitioner
*Loss of love and Rs.1,50,000 Rs.1,20,000*
affection to 2nd, 3rd (Rs.40,000/- each
and 4th petitioners to petitioners 2, 3
and 4)
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
Particulars Award Enhanced /
Amount modified amount
Funeral and Ritual Rs.25,000 Rs.15,000
expenses
Loss of estate Rs.10,000 Rs.15,000
Total Rs.15,32,500 Rs.23,32,000
16.In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The second respondent
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the modified amount awarded by
this Court together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date
of claim till the date of deposit after deducting the amount already deposited if
any to the credit MCOP.No.1559 of 2010 within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made,
the Tribunal shall transfer the respective shares of award amount lying to the
credit of MCOP.No.1559 of 2010 to the bank account of the major
Appellants/claimants 1, 3 and 4 as per the ratio apportioned through RTGS,
within a period of one week thereafter. Since the second Appellant is a
minor, her share of the award amount shall be deposited in interest bearing
fixed deposit in any one of the Nationalised Banks, till she attains the age of
majority. If the minor Appellant has attained the age of majority, it is open to
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
her to file a formal petition before the Tribunal to get her share of
apportionment. The requisite Court fee, if any has to be paid by the
Appellants/claimants before receiving the copy of this Judgment. No costs.
23.04.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
pam
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1494 of 2016
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
pam
C.M.A.No.1494 of
23.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
