Madras High Court
M/S.Reliance General Insurance ... vs M.Jayachithra on 1 December, 2021
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021 &
C.M.P.No.12752 of 2021
(Heard through VC)
M/s.Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.6, 6th Floor, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.M.Jayachithra
2.Minor M.Karthikeyan
3.Minor M.Akshaya,
Minor 2 and 3 are rep by their
Next friend and NF M.Jayachitra,
4.Dhanalakshmi
All are residing at No.312,
Nethaji Street, Kakkanji Colony,
Vyasarpadi, Chennai - 600 039.
5.B.Arunkumar ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2019 made in
M.C.O.P.No.4816 of 2015, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II
Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
For Appellant : Mr.S.Arunkumar
For Respondents : Mr.K.Vardha Kaamaraj
for R1 to R3
No appearance for R4 and R5
(Notice served)
JUDGMENT
Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.SIVAGNANAM. J.
This appeal arises out of the Judgment and award passed by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai, in
M.C.O.P.No.4816 of 2015, wherein the Tribunal has awarded compensation of
Rs.33,40,000/-.
2. The facts in brief necessary for disposal of the appeal would run
thus:-
The respondents 1 to 4 / claimants are the legal heirs of one
Muralimani, who died in a road accident. On 13.05.2015 at about 07.00 p.m.,
the said Muralimani was as a pedestrian proceeded to cross the road from west
to east byepass road, Maduravoyal. At that time a Pulsar Motorcycle bearing
registration No.TN-19-Q-3018 proceeded from north to south direction rode by
its rider in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the deceased. In the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
impact, the deceased was thrown out and sustained multiple fatal injuries all
over his body. Immediately, the deceased was taken to Government Hospital,
Tambaram, and he was died on the same day. Alleging that the accident had
taken place due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the two
wheeler, which was insured with the appellant-Insurance Company, the
claimants laid a petition, claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-.
3. Resisting the claim, the appellant M/s.Reliance General Insurance Co.
Ltd., filed their counter disputing the manner of accident, age, occupation
and income of the deceased and its liability to pay the compensation. The
accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent act of the deceased who
was not in a sound state of mind who was precariously walking along the road,
posing a danger to the motorists was solely responsible for the alleged
accident. Since the deceased was a tortfeasor, the Insurance Company cannot
be made liable to pay compensation.
4. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimants 2 witnesses were
examined and 7 documents were marked. On appreciation of evidence
adduced by the parties, the Tribunal held that the occurrence occurred due to
the negligence of the driver of the Pulsar Motorcycle bearing registration
No.TN-19-Q-3018 and awarded compensation of Rs.33,40,000/- along with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. Questioning the award, the present appeal
has been filed.
5. The primary submission of the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company is that in the absence of proof towards alleged avocation and
earning, ought not to have fixed a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month as income
and therefore, Rs.28,35,000/- awarded under the head of 'loss of dependency'
is extremely on the higher side, and hence, the same needs appropriate
reduction. The learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to the
amounts awarded under the heads of 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 of
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.25,000/- for filial
consortium. Then again, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,25,000/-
under the head of love and affection. 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.4/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
7. This appeal has been filed only challenging the quantum, hence, the
other issues need not be dealt with herein.
8. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that
without any valid proof, the Tribunal has fixed the notional income of
Rs.15,000/- per month, which is exorbitant. In the case on hand, the Tribunal
by relying on the evidence of P.W.1, the wife of the deceased, fixed the
income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per month. Considering the cost of
living prevalent at the time of the accident, this Court is of the view that a
sum of Rs.15,000/- fixed as monthly income of the deceased is on the higher
side, hence, the same is reduced to Rs.12,000/-. At the time of accident, the
deceased was aged about 38 years and therefore, by adding 40% towards
future prospects, the monthly salary of the deceased is arrived at Rs.16,800/-.
Since the dependants are four in numbers, 1/4th of the amount is deducted
towards personal expenses and the contribution to his family comes at
Rs.12,600/-. As per the decision in the case of Sarala Verma and others vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation [2009 (6) SCC 121], the proper multiplier
would be “15” and therefore, the loss of income is assessed as Rs.22,68,000/-
[12,600 x 12 x 15]. In addition to that, this Court is inclined to modify the
award passed by the Tribunal under the conventional heads.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
9. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of Estate and
hence, this Court awards Rs.15,000/- under the head of Loss of Estate;
Further, the sum of Rs.2,25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of
"loss of love and affection" and a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal under the head of "Parental Consortium" are hereby set aside. As per
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Nanu Ram and others reported in 2018(1) TN MAC
452 (SC), the first respondent / first claimant is entitled to a sum of
Rs.40,000/- under the head of "consortium" and the claimants 2 to 4 /
respondents 2 to 4 are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each (in total
Rs.1,20,000/-) under the head of "Filial Consortium". Rs.15,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal under the head of 'funeral expenses' is confirmed. Hence, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the appellants is re-quantified as
follows:-
Heads Rs.
Loss of dependency Rs. 22,68,000/-
Consortium to the first respondent Rs. 40,000/-
Filial Consortium (Respondents 2 to 4) Rs. 1,20,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total Rs.24,58,000/-
Hence, the award amount is reduced to Rs.24,58,000/- from Rs.33,40,000/-.
In total, the claimants are entitled to Rs.24,58,000/- along with interest at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.6/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of
realization.
10. In view of the above modifications, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
above modified award amount with accrued 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 order. On such deposit, the major claimants are
permitted to withdraw their share of the modified award amount along with
proportionate interest and costs, as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by
the Tribunal, less the amount already withdrawn, if any. The share of the
minor claimants shall be deposited in any one of the nationalized banks in a
fixed deposit till they attain majority. The interest accruing on the minors
deposit is permitted to be withdrawn by the mother of the minor claimants,
viz., Jayachitra, the first respondent herein, once in three months. There is
no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
01.12.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
rns
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
To
1. The II Court of Small Causes,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.8/9
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
rns
C.M.A. No.2296 of 2021 &
C.M.P.No.12752 of 2021
01.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.9/9
