Madras High Court
Royal Sundaram Alliance ... vs N.Sarguna on 9 April, 2021
CMA No.840 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 09.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
THE HONOURABLE TMT.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
CMA.No.840 of 2020
and
CMP.No. 5387 of 2020
Royal Sundaram Alliance Ins.Co.Ltd.,
Subramaniam Buildings,
Club House Road,
Chennai – 600 002. …. Appellant
Versus
1.N.Sarguna
2.B.Varsha (minor)
3.B.Raksheeth (minor)
Minors represented by their
mother and next friend B.Sarguna
4.P.Selvi
5.Pandian
6.D.Venkatesan …. Respondents
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 23.09.2019 made in
MCOP No.5550 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(II Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Arun Kumar
For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.A.Venkatesan
For R5 : Exparte
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/8
CMA No.840 of 2020
JUDGMENT
(The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.KANNAMMAL, J)
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the Judgment and
Decree dated 23.09.2019 made in MCOP No.5550 of 2013 on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II Court of Small Causes), Chennai. The
main challenge in the appeal is only with regard to quantum of compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows :-
On 30.12.2012 at about 16.30 hours when the deceased was riding his
two wheeler, the van belonging to the 5th respondent herein, came in a rash and
negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. As a result, the deceased
sustained injuries and he was admitted in the hospital. Despite the treatment,
he succumbed to the injuries. The respondents 1 to 5 herein, as claimants, filed
a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai, claiming
compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for the death of the sole breadwinner of their
family.
3. The claimants examined two witnesses and marked 11 documents.
On the side of the respondents one witness was examined and no document was
marked.
4. The Tribunal, on analysis of both oral and documentary evidence, held
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
that the accident had occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the
van driver. Since, the vehicle was insured with the appellant herein, the
Insurance Company was fastened with the liability to pay the compensation
amount. Curiously, though the claim was made only Rs.30,00,000/- for the
claimants, the Tribunal has awarded as whooping a sum of Rs.42,65,000/-.
Challenging the quantum of compensation, the Insurance Company has filed
this Appeal.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company vehemently
argued that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very huge and for the
same category, under different heads, huge sums were awarded. The learned
counsel drew the attention of this Court to the amounts awarded under the head
loss of consortium, parental consortium, filial consortium and loss of love and
affection. The learned counsel argued that though the Tribunal has awarded a
sum of Rs.40,000/- under the head for loss of consortium, it still, went one step
further and awarded a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- for parental consortium and a sum
of Rs.1,00,000/- for filial consortium. Then again, the Tribunal has awarded a
sum of Rs.2,50,000/- under the head “loss of love and affection”. Therefore, the
learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal has been more generous in
awarding compensation to the claimants over and above what was sought for.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
Therefore, the learned counsel submitted that the interference of this Court is
required to reduce the compensation.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants on the other hand supported the
Judgment and Decree passed by the Tribunal and prayed that the Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal be dismissed.
7. Heard both sides. Perused the materials available on record.
8. A perusal of the Judgment of the Tribunal would show that the
Tribunal was more bighearted and showered more compensation under the
same category but in different heads. As rightly pointed out by the learned
counsel for the appellant, a cursory glance of the compensation awarded under
different heads would show that the Tribunal has awarded in total, a sum of
Rs.5,90,000/- under the same clause. Definitely, the same needs interference.
9. This Court is conscious of the fact that the first claimant is a very
young widow with two little children. The claimants 4 and 5 are aged parents
of the deceased. The family has lost their sole breadwinner. However a bounty
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
cannot be showered on the claimants more so and the claim is only for a sum of
Rs.30,00,000/-. Whereas, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.42,65,000/-.
This Court is of the view that though different nomenclature are used, it all still
carry the same meaning. Without an iota of doubt grieving family should be
compensated for the loss of love and affection. Therefore, a sum of Rs.40,000/-
is awarded to each of the claimants and in total a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is
awarded to the family members towards the loss of love and affection clubbing
parental consortium and filial consortium under the head of loss of love and
affection.
10. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal would stand modified in
different heads as under :-
Heads Amount awarded by Amount modified by this
the Tribunal (Rs.) Court (Rs.)
Loss of Dependency 36,45,000 36,45,000
Loss of Consortium 40,000 40,000
Loss of Love and Affection 2,50,000 2,00,000
Parental consortium 2,00,000 -
Filial consortium 1,00,000 -
Loss of estate - 15,000
Medical expenses 15,000 15,000
Funeral expenses 15,000 15,000
Total 42,65,000 39,30,000
11. Out of the said total compensation of Rs.39,30,000/-, the parents, the
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
claimants 4 and 5 will be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-each. The first
claimant, wife of the deceased will be entitled to a sum of Rs.7,30,000/-. The
claimants 2 and 3, the children of the deceased, will be entitled to a sum of
Rs.5,00,000/- each.
12. It is directed that the compensation awarded to the minors viz.,
Rs.15,00,000/- each, will be deposited in the individual names of the minors in
any Nationalized Bank in a fixed deposit till the minors attain majority. The
direction of the Tribunal with regard to the maintenance of the fixed deposit of
the minors is confirmed.
13. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is
partly allowed. No cost. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
[R.P.S.,J] [S.K.,J]
09.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
lpp
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
To
1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(II Court of Small Causes), Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
R.SUBBIAH, J.
and
S.KANNAMMAL, J.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CMA No.840 of 2020
CMA.No.840 of 2020
and
CMP.No. 5387 of 2020
09.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
