Madras High Court
B.Saraswathi vs Syed Fareedduddin Hussaini on 5 August, 2021
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.08.2021
:CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
1. B.Saraswathi
2. A.Baskar
3. B.Sangeetha
4. B.Praveenkumar .. Appellants
Vs.
1.Syed Fareedduddin Hussaini
2. The Divisional Manager,
National Insurance Company Limited
No.19, Officer's line,
Vellore. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Order and Judgment dated 17.04.2017
in M.C.O.P.No.336/2013 on the file of Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Sub
Court, Ranipet, Vellore District.
For Appellants : Mr.G.Rajan
For R2 : Mr.J.Chandran (R2)
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 17.04.2019 made in
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
M.C.O.P.No.336 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sub Court, Ranipet, Vellore District.
2.The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.336 of 2013 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court Ranipet, Vellore
District. They filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one B.Sathish Kumar, who
died in an accident that took place on 31.08.2013.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the car belonging to 1st respondent and directed the first and
second respondents to pay a sum of Rs.8,38,000/- as compensation to the
appellants 1 and 2 and the claim in respect of the appellants 3 and 4 was
dismissed.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the
deceased has completed B.A.History and was working as Assistant in Harman
Clicking Dies, Ranipet and was earning a sum of Rs.14,000/- per month. To
prove the same, the appellants examined one Abdul Salam, who is the
Accountant of Harman Ranipet Clicking Dies as P.W.3, and filed Ex.P13 to
show that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.14,000/- per month as gross
income, but the Tribunal failed to consider the evidence of P.W.3 and Ex.P13
and fixed a meagre sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional income of the
deceased. The Tribunal ought to have fixed a sum of Rs.20,000/- as monthly
income of the deceased after taking the future prospects and devaluation of
currency into consideration and awarded compensation. The amounts awarded
by the Tribunal towards loss love and affection to appellants 1 & 2 is meagre.
The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards transportation and prayed for
enhancement of compensation.
6.Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance
Company contended that the claim in respect of the appellants 3 and 4 were
dismissed before the Tribunal for the reason that as per Ex.P4-Legal Heirship
Certificate, the appellants 1 and 2 alone are to be treated as legal heirs of the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
deceased. The Tribunal considering the evidence of P.W3, and Ex.P13, and
also based on the materials available on record and taking note of technical
qualification and likelihood of the employment fixed a sum of Rs.6,000/- per
month as notional income of the deceased and the same is not meagre. The
amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of love and affection to
appellants 1 & 2 is not meagre. The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is not meagre. The appellants have not made out any case for
enhancement of compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials on record.
8.It is the case of the appellants that at the time of accident the deceased
was aged 23 years, working as Assistant in Harman Ranipet Clicking Dies,
Ranipet and was earning a sum of Rs.14,000/- per month. To prove the same,
the appellants examined one Abdul Salam, who is the Accountant of Harman
Ranipet Clicking Dies as P.W.3 and filed Ex.P13 to show that the deceased
was earning a sum of Rs.14,000/- per month as gross income. The Tribunal
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
considering the evidence of P.W.3, Ex.P13, and also based on the materials
available on record and by taking note of technical qualification and likelihood
of the employment fixed a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional income of
the deceased. The cost of living has increased enormously and salary of even
unskilled workers has increased substantially. Hence, a sum of Rs.10,000/- per
month is fixed as notional income of the deceased. The deceased was aged 23
years at the time of accident. By, following the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 609 (SC), [National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others] and 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 SC Supreme
Court, [Sarla Verma & others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another],
40% enhancement is awarded towards future prospects of the deceased and by
applying multiplier '18' and since the deceased is a bachelor, by deducting 50%
towards personal expenses of the deceased compensation awarded by the
Tribunal towards loss of dependency is modified to Rs.15,12,000/-
[Rs.10,000/- + Rs.4000/- (40% of Rs.10,000/-)] X 12 X 18- 50%}.
9. On considering the documents available on record and upon hearing
submissions made on either side, this Court finds that the compensation
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
awarded by the Tribunal towards Love and Affection may be reduced and
accordingy the same is reduced to Rs.40,000/- and further compensation
towards Loss of expectancy of life and Mental Agony need not be granted and
therefore no compensation is awarded towards Loss of expentancy of life and
Mental agongy and hence no compensation is awarded under the said heads.
Loss of Estate is increased to Rs.15,000/-and Transportation Expenses is
awarded at Rs.5,000/-. The compensation awarded towards Medical Bills and
Funeral Expenses remains unaltered.
10.Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as
follows:
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of dependency 6,48,000/- 15,12,000/- Enhanced
2. Loss of Love and 50,000/- 40,000/- Reduced
Affection
3. Loss of Expectation 1,00,000/- Nil Nil
of life
4. Loss of Estate 5,000/- 15,000/- Enhanced
5. Funeral Expenses 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
6. Transport Expenses Nil 5,000/- Granted
7. Mental Agony 20,000/- Nil Not granted
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
8. Medical Bills 5,000/- 5,000/- Confirmed
Total Rs.8,38,000/- Rs.15,87,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.7,49,000/-
10.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.8,38,000/- is hereby enhanced
to Rs.15,87,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of deposit. The appellants 1 and 2 are entitled for
the compensation as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal. The
respondents 1 and 2 are directed to deposit the award amount now determined
by this Court, along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited,
if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.336 of 2013 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Ranipet. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal
is directed to transfer the Award amount directly to the Bank account of the
Appellant/Claimant through RTGS, within a period of two weeks. The
appellants/claimants 1 and 2 shall pay necessary Court fee, if any, on the
enhanced compensation. No costs.However, it is made clear that as observed
by the Claims Tribunal, no compensation is granted to the appellants 3 and 4.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
No costs.
05.08.2021
arr
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Ranipet.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
arr
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
C.M.A.No.2981 of 2017
05.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
