Madras High Court
The General Manager vs Vijayasanthi on 19 August, 2021
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021 and
C.M.P.No.7626 of 2021
The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Thiruchurapalli. ...Appellant
vs.
1. Vijayasanthi
2. Minor. Keshika
3. Minor. Suganthan
Minors 2 and 3 rep by their mother Vijayasanthi
4. Jeyamani
5. Natarajan
6. The Administrator,
United India Insurance Company Limited,
50 A, Pallivasal Street,
Perambalur (Dt) – 621 212. ...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 02.11.2020
made in M.C.O.P.No. 106 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ariyalur.
Page No.1 of 9
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
For Appellant : Mr. D. Venkatachalam
For Respondents : Mr. R. Jayaprakash for R1 to R4
Mr.M.J.Vijayaraghavan for R6
No appearance for R5
*****
JUDGMENT
This Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation challenging
the Award dated 02.11.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur, in
M.C.O.P.No. 106 of 2014, directing the Appellant/Transport Corporation to
Claimants 50% of Rs.18,84,400/-(the total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal) for the death of the deceased, who succumbed to the injuries
sustained in an accident which occurred on 06.08.2013 involving the bus
owned by the Appellant/Transport Corporation. Respondents 1 to
4/Claimants are the dependants of the deceased viz., wife, daughter, Son and
mother.
2. Before the Tribunal, the Respondents/Claimants claimed a sum of
Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him. On the
side of the First Respondent/Claimant, P.W.1 to P.W.3 were examined as
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
witnesses and Exs.P1 to P17 were marked before the Tribunal. On the side
of the Appellant/Transport Corporation, R.W.1 to R.W.3 were examined as
witnesses and Ex.R1 to R3 were marked.
3. On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence
available on record, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.18,84,400/- as
compensation to the Respondents 1 to 4/Claimants. Details of the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned Award, are as
follows :
Amount awarded by
Heads
the Tribunal (Rs.)
Loss of Income 18,14,400
Loss of Estate 15,000
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of consortium 40,000
Total Rs.18,84,400/-
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material documents available on record.
5. The Appellant has challenged the impugned award on the
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
ground that the learned Trial Judge failed to consider the F.I.R which has
been registered against the driver of the Tata Sumo. He further submitted
that the Claims Tribunal has erroneously fixed 50% negligence on the side
of the Appellant/Transport Corporation. He further submitted that the
Tribunal has fixed the monthly income of the deceased @ Rs.9,000/- which
is on the higher side. He further submitted that the overall compensation
awarded to the Claimants are very high and the same needs to be reduced.
6. Insofar as the first contention raised by the Appellant is
concerned, though F.I.R has been registered against the driver of the Tata
Sumo, from Exs.R1 &R2 -Rough sketch, it is clear that the accident
occurred not only due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the Tata
Sumo, but also on the part of the driver of the Transport Corporation. By
taking note of the fact that the Appellant's vehicle is a heavy vehicle and the
major loss would be caused to TATA SUMO vehicle,as it is lighter one, had
rightly fixed negligence on the driver of both vehicles. Therefore, the
Judgment and Decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur, fixing joint liability on
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
the Appellant/Transport Corporation & 2nd Respondent/ Insurance company
is perfectly right and the same needs to be confirmed.
7. Insofar as the income of the deceased is concerned, the Tribunal by
taking note of the fact that the deceased was a driver by profession at the
time of accident, has rightly fixed Rs.300/- per day and the monthly income
of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- which is just and proper and the same need
not be interfered with. As there are four dependants for the deceased, by
deducting 1/4th of the monthly income is deducted towards personal
expenses as per the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another,
reported in, 2009(2) TN MAC (SC), and by adding 40% towards future
prospects as per the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in
2017 STPL 13374 SC and by adopting multiplier 16, the Claims Tribunal
has rightly fixed the loss of earning of the deceased at Rs.18,14,400/ -
(Rs.9000x12+Rs.3,600(Rs.9000x40/100)- 1/4 i.e., 3150 x16) which is not
said to be excessive and the same does not warrant interference.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
8. Further as the Claimants lost the deceased who is the husband of
the First Claimant, the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation towards
the Loss of Consortium to the First Claimant at Rs.40,000/- and further no
compensation has been awarded towards Love and Affection and hence this
Court finds that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meagre.
9. Considering the fact that the Claimants lost the deceased, who
is the sole bread winner of the family, the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal to the Respondents 1 to 4/Claimants under various
heads, totalling a sum of Rs.18,84,400/-, cannot be considered to be
excessive, as alleged by the Appellant/ Transport Corporation. For the
foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in this Appeal and
accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
10. The Appellant/Transport Corporation and the Insurance
company/Third respondent are directed to deposit 50% each the entire
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
amount awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 7.5% per annum
from the date of the Claim Petition till the date of realization, less the
amount, if any, already deposited to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.106 of 2014
on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Ariyalur within a period of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the
Tribunal is directed to transfer the Award amount, as apportioned by the
Tribunal directly to the Bank account of the Respondents/Claimants 1 and 4
through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter. The share of the
minor respondents/claimants viz., Respondents/Claimants 2 and 3 are
directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Banks till they attain
majority and the interest accrued thereon shall be withdrawn by the First
Respondent/Mother once in three months.
19.08.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
(arr)/(shk)
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
To:
1. The Motor accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District and sessions Judge,
Ariyalur.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai 600 104.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.
(arr)/(shk)
C.M.A. No.1463 of 2021
19.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1463 of 2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
