Madras High Court

Gangulamma vs Mokkala Bharathi on 28 April, 2021

C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28.04.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.6630 of 2021

C.M.A.No.1692 of 2020
1. Gangulamma
W/o.Late Chalapathi
2. Madhusudan
S/o.Late Chalapathi
3. Srikanth
S/o.Late Chalapathi
4. Rajesh
S/o.Late Chalapathi ... Appellants

vs.
1. Mokkala Bharathi
D/o.M.Krishna Mohan Goud

2. M/s.IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited,
Having its Office at
No.28, 1st and 2nd Floor,
North Usman Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. ... Respondents

C.M.A.No.1309 of 2021
M/s.IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance Company Limited,
No.28, 1st and 2nd Floor,
North Usman Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. ... Appellant

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 1 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

vs.
1. Gangulamma
W/o.Late Chalapathi
2. Madhusudan
S/o.Late Chalapathi
3. Srikanth
S/o.Late Chalapathi
4. Rajesh
S/o.Late Chalapathi
5. Mokkala Bharathi
D/o.M.Krishna Mohan Goud ... Respondents

Common Prayer:Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated
28.11.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.1012 of 2015, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, IV Additional District Court, Ponneri.

CMA.No.1692 of 2020

For Appellants : Ms.A.Subadra for Mr.K.M.Ramesh
For Respondents :
For R1 : Exparte
For R2 : Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam

CMA.No.1309 of 2021

For Appellant : Mr.J.Michael Visuvassam
For Respondents :
For R1 to R4 : Ms.A.Subadra for Mr.K.M.Ramesh
For R5 : Exparte

COMMON JUDGMENT

By this common judgment both these appeal are being disposed of.

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 2 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

2. C.M.A.No.1692 of 2020 has been filed by the claimants for

enhancement of compensation and C.M.A.No.1309 of 2021 has been

filed by the Insurance Company.

3. In C.M.A.No.1692 of 2020, the appellants/claimants have asked

for enhancement of compensation by another sum of Rs.1,47,500/-. The

insurance company has asked for reduction of compensation of

Rs.4,20,000/- by stating that the Tribunal ought to have awarded a lesser

amount of compensation.

4. The Tribunal has considered the notional income of the deceased

as Rs.9,500/- per month and applying multiplier of 15 to award the above

compensation.

5. The deceased-Chalapathi was stated to be engaged in catering

business and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. On behalf of the

2nd respondent/Insurance Company, it is stated that during deposition, the

1st appellant-P.W.1 has admitted that the deceased was an employee who

was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month and therefore it was

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 3 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

incumbent on the part of the appellants/claimants to substantiate that the

deceased was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. It is further

submitted that the Tribunal has considered a higher notional income of

Rs.9,500/- as compensation.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the

respondents. I have perused the impugned Judgment and decree and the

evidences on record and the deposition of witnessess that were marked

before the Tribunal.

7. The deceased was aged about 50 years at the time of accident

and therefore the Tribunal ought to have applied correct multiplier as 13

instead it has applied 15. It has considered the notional income as

Rs.9,500/- per month.

8. In my view, the aforesaid amount of Rs.9,500/- is

disproportionately low. Considering the year of the accident in 2015, for

the purpose of awarding compensation, this Court is inclined to consider

the notional income of the deceased as Rs.13,500/- per month. Since the

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 4 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

deceased was aged about 50 years, was working in an unauthorized

sector, there shall be an addition of 10% towards future prospects.

9. The deceased appears to be supporting his family concerns, his

wife and three children aged about 28, 27 & 24 years. Nevertheless, in

the indian set up it has to be considered that all of them are living as joint

family in absence of contra evidence. Therefore, there shall be deduction

of 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased.

10. In the light of the above, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is re-computed as follows:-

Heads and Calculation Amount
Loss of earning capacity:-

Monthly Income : Rs.13,500/-

Add: *Future Prospects at 10%
(13,500 x 10/100) : Rs. 1,350/-
----------------
: Rs.14,850/-
Less: Personal Expenses 1/4th
(14,850 x 1/4) : Rs. 3,713/-
----------------
: Rs. 3,713/-

Annual Contribution to the family
(3,713 x 12) : Rs.44,556/-

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 5 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

Heads and Calculation Amount

**Multiplier 13 (44,556 x 13) : Rs.5,79,228/- Rs.5,79,228/-
Loss of consortium to the appellant
Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of Love and Affection to the 2nd to 4th Rs. 75,000/-
appellants (Rs.25,000/- each)
Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
Transportation Rs. 10,000/-
Total Rs.7,34,228/-
Rounded off to
Rs.7,34,230/-

* Future prospects is added by this Court at 10% as per the

decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company

Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680.

** Proper Multiplier of 13 is fixed by this court as per the decision

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Vs.

Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 12.

11. The 1st appellant/1st claimant is directed to pay the deficit court

fee within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this order. Only after such deposit of deficit court fee, the Registry

shall draft the decree of this Judgment.

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 6 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

12. The 2nd respondent/Insurance Company is however directed to

deposit the amount of compensation of Rs.7,34,230/- after deducting

amount already deposited by it 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 within a period of six weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

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

Company, the appellants/claimants are permitted to withdraw their

respective shares in the same proportion as was ordered by the Tribunal,

together with interest accrued thereon, less the amount already

withdrawn if any, by filing suitable application before the Tribunal.

While filing such application, the appellants/claimants shall produce a

certified copy of the decree of this Judgment as a proof of having paid

the deficit court fee.

14. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellants/claimants in

C.M.A.No.1692 of 2020 is partly allowed and C.M.A.No.1309 of 2021

_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Page No 7 of 12
C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

C.SARAVANAN, J.

arb

filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. No cost. Consequently,

connected Civil Miscellaneous petition is closed.

28.04.2021

arb Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order

Note:

After the 1st appellant deposited the deficit court fee, the Registry is directed to draft the decree.

To:

1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, IV Additional District Court, Ponneri.

2. The Section Officer, Vernacular Section, Madras High Court.

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 8 of 12 C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.6630 of 2021

C.SARAVANAN,J.

At the instance of the learned counsel for the appellant, these cases

are listed today under the caption 'for being mentioned' as there are

certain calculation errors in C.M.A.No.1692 of 2020.

2. While calculating the compensation, there was inadvertent

mistake in the Judgment dated 28.04.2021. Hence, the calculation in

para No.10 and para Nos.11 & 12 of the Judgment dated 28.04.2021 shall

stand deleted and the substituted as follows.

Re-quantified Heads & Calculation amount of Compensation by this Court Loss of dependency

i) Monthly Income of the deceased : Rs.13,500/-

ii) Add: Future prospects @ 10% : Rs. 1,350/-

--------------- : Rs.14,850/-

------------------

: Rs.14,850/-

iii) Less : Personal Expenses @ 1/4 (Rs.14,850 x1/4) : Rs. 3,713/-

----------------

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 9 of 12 C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

Re-quantified Heads & Calculation amount of Compensation by this Court : Rs. 11,137/-

----------------

iv) Annual Contribution to the family (Rs.11,137x12) : Rs.1,33,644/-

v)Multiplier 13 Rs. 17,37,372/-

                          (Rs.1,33,644 x13)                       :
                       Rs.17,37,372/-

                         Loss of consortium                                                Rs.      40,000/-

Loss o Love and affection to the 2nd to 4th appellants (Rs.25,000/- x 3 = Rs.75,000) Rs. 75,000/- Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/- Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Transportation Rs. 10,000/-

                                                                   Total                   Rs. 18,92,372/-
                                                                                             rounded off to
                                                                                           Rs. 18,93,000/-

“ 11. The 1st appellant/1st claimant is directed to pay the additional court fee on the enhanced compensation amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Only on payment of additional court fee, the Registry will draft the Decree copy to facilitate the withdrawal of the enhanced amount of compensation from the Tribunal. The appellants are therefore also

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 10 of 12 C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

directed to produce the proof of such deposit of court fee before the Registry for drafting of the decree.

12. The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company is therefore directed to deposit the enhanced award amount of compensation of Rs.18,93,000/- now determined by this Court together with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.1012 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (IV Additional District Court) Ponneri, less any amount already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. ”

3. Registry is directed to furnish a fresh copy of the order to the

parties.

28.06.2021

kkd

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 11 of 12 C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021

C.SARAVANAN,J.

kkd

C.M.A.Nos.1692 of 2020 & 1309 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.6630 of 2021

28.06.2021

_________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Page No 12 of 12