Narasimman vs S.Pratap
2021 Latest Caselaw 10718 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10718 Mad
Judgement Date : 27 April, 2021

Madras High Court

Narasimman vs S.Pratap on 27 April, 2021

                                                                           C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED: 27.04.2021

                                                     CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

                                             C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

                 1.Narasimman
                 2.Usha                                                    ... Appellants

                                                       Vs.

                 1.S.Pratap
                 2.The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd,
                   Third Party Claims Cell (HUB),
                   Near Murugan Theatre,
                   Sathuvachari, Vellore – 9.
                 (No relief sought against the 1st respondent.
                  Hence notice may be dispensed with)                    ... Respondents

                       Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
                 Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree order dated
                 23.04.2018 made in M.C.O.P.No.74 of 2016, on the file of the Motor
                 Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and Sessions Court,
                 Ranipet, Vellore District.

                                   For Appellants  : Mr.M.Sivakumar
                                   For Respondents : Mr.J.Vijayaraghavan for R2
                                                     No appearance for R1




                    _________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                 Page No 1 of 6
                                                                              C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

                                                      JUDGMENT

The claimants are the parents of the deceased Parameswaran aged

about 21 years who lost his life when he met with an accident on

22.011.2015. By the impugned judgment and decree, the Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs.6,83,000/- as compensation by considering the

notional income of Rs.6,000/- per month. Challenging the quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the present appeal has been filed

for enhancement of the compensation. The learned counsel for the

appellant submits that the accident is of the year 2015 and therefore the

notional income considered by the Tribunal was disproportionately low

and therefore he submits that the income of the deceased may be

considered as Rs.15,000/- per month for awarding enhanced

compensation.

2.The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that this

court has passed an order in C.M.A.No.1069 of 2013 dated 01.09.2020

wherein in the case of a Final year B.E. student, this court has considered

the notional income of Rs.18,000/- per month to award compensation for

an accident of the year 2009.

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 2 of 6 C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

3.Defending the impugned judgment and decree, the learned

counsel for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company submits that the

Tribunal has awarded just compensation and that the notional income of

Rs.6,000/- was correct for awarding the compensation.

4.I have perused the impugned judgment and decree and the

evidence on record which form the basis on the impugned judgment and

decree. I have also considered the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellant and the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company.

5.In my view, the Tribunal has considered a meagre notional

income of Rs.6,000/- for awarding the above compensation. Therefore,

with a view to award a just compensation for the loss of their son, I am

inclined to consider the notional income of the deceased as Rs.12,500/-

considering the fact that the deceased was a 3 rd year B.E. Student. At the

same time “Pay and Recover” ordered by the Tribunal is confirmed.

6.Under these circumstances, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is re-quantified as follows:-

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 3 of 6 C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

Monthly Notional Income Rs.12,500/- Rs.18,90,000/- + Future Prospectus 40% Rs. 5,000/-

                      * as per National Insurance
                     Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi
                    and Others, (2017)
                    16 SCC 680                 --------------
                                               Rs.17,500/-
                    Personal expenses
                    50%                        Rs. 8,750/-

                    Annual Contribution
                    to the family
                    (8,750 x 12)               Rs.1,05,000/-

                    (Multiplier x 18)          Rs.18,90,000/-

Loss of love and affection/Filial consortium Rs. 80,000/- * as per Magma Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanuram @ Chuhruram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130 Transportation and funeral expenses Rs. 25,000/-

Total Rs.19,95,000/-

7.The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company is therefore directed to

deposit the enhanced amount of compensation together with interest at

7.5% per annum from the date of numbering of the claim petition till the

date of such deposit, less any amount already deposited by it, within a

period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 4 of 6 C.M.A.No.2714 of 2019

8.On such deposit being made by the 2nd respondent/Insurance

Company, the 1st appellant/1st claimant is permitted to withdraw the same

together with interest accrued thereon, less any amount already

withdrawn in the same proportion as was ordered by the Tribunal.

9.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands Partly Allowed with the