Shriram General Insurance Co. ... vs Murali ... 1St
2021 Latest Caselaw 24211 Mad

                                                                                    CMA No.3426 of 2021

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 09.12.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

                                              CMA No.3426 of 2021
                                                      And
                                             C.M.P.No. 19775 of 2021

                     Shriram General Insurance Co. Limited.,
                     5F, 1st Floor, Sachin Plaza
                     Reddiyar Block No.1,
                     Salem Post and District                     ... Appellant/2nd Respondent

                                                         Vs
                     1. Murali                                ... 1st Respondent/1st Petitioner

                     2. Minor Yogashree           ... 2nd Respondent/2nd Petitioner

                     3. Minor Poornima                        ... 3rd Respondent/3rd Petitioner

                     4. Minor Shivani                         ... 4th Respondent/4th Petitioner

                     5. Karikalasolan                         ... 5th Respondent/1st Respondent


                     Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
                     Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the award dated 8 th day of March 2021 made
                     in M.C.O.P.No. 192 of 2018, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
                     (Special District Court), Dharmapuri.



                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                       CMA No.3426 of 2021

                                           For Appellant      : Mr. S.Dhakshnamoorthy

                                           For RR 1 to 4       : Mr.Amar D. Pandya


                                                    JUDGMENT

Admit.

2. Since the respondents are an caveat and the Appeal lies in a

very limited scope, the Appeal itself is taken up for disposal.

3. Heard Mr. S.Dhakshnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant/ Insurance Company and Mr.Amar D. Pandya, learned counsel

for the respondents 1 to 4/claimants.

4. Since the liability of the Insurance Company is not being

questioned, notice to the 5th respondent is dispensed with.

5. The claimants sought for compensation for the death of wife of

the first claimant and mother of the claimants 2, 3 and 4 in a motor accident

that occurred on 17.01.2018. The deceased was aged about 22 years and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

she was working as accountant drawing a salary of Rs.14,500/- per month.

The claimants thus sought for compensation of Rs.67,56,000/-. The

Insurance Company resisted the claim contending that the accident did not

occur in the manner suggested and the deceased had also contributed to the

accident. It is further contended by the Insurance Company that the

quantum of compensation claimed is not realistic.

6. The Tribunal on a consideration of the evidence on record

concluded that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation as

the accident occurred only due to the negligence of the offending vehicle,

namely, Van bearing No. TN 29 AS 4512 insured with the

Appellant/Insurance Company. On the quantum, the Tribunal took the

monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- disbelieving the salary

certificate produced as Ex.P-11. The Tribunal add 50% to the future

prospectus and arrived at the provisional income of Rs.15,000/-. The annual

income was thus calculated at Rs.1,80,000/-. The Tribunal deducted 1/4th

for the personal expenses of the deceased and arrived at the annual loss of

dependency at Rs.1,35,000/-. Applying the multiplier of 18, the Tribunal

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

arrived at the pecuniary loss at Rs.24,30,000/-. The Tribunal granted a sum

of Rs.1,90,000/- towards conventional damages. Thus, the total

compensation of Rs.26,20,000/-.

7. The Tribunal apportioned the compensation payable as

follows:-

The first petitioner/husband = Rs.11,20,800/-

Minor petitioners 2 to 4 = Rs.5,00,000/- each

8. The first petitioner was permitted to withdraw 50% of his share

with accrued interest and cost immediately. The remaining amount was

directed to be invested in a Fixed Deposit in a nationalised bank for a period

of three years and the first petitioner was permitted to withdraw the interest

once in six months. The shares allotted to the minors were directed to kept

in deposit till they attain majority and the first petitioner was permitted to

withdraw the interest once in six months for maintenance of the minors.

9. Mr. S.Dhakshnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal erred in adopting 50%

for future prospectus. According to him, as per the Judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in (2017) 16 SCC 680 [National Insurance Company Ltd.,

Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.], the future prospects allowable for 22 years old

person working in a non Governmental organisation is only 40% and not

50%. The learned counsel has no quarrel either with the income fixed or the

quantum of conventional damages awarded.

10. Mr. Amar D. Pandya, learned counsel appearing for the

claimants would also agree that the quantum of future prospects must be

only 40% and not 50%.

11. In view of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for

the parties, the compensation awarded for loss of dependency is worked out

taking future prospects at 40%.

Monthly income fixed at Rs.10,000/- add 40% towards future

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

prospectus = Rs.14,000/- (10,000 + 4000)

deduct 1/4th for personal expenses = Rs.10,500/- (14,000 – 3,500)

Annual loss of dependency = 1,26,000 (10,500 x 12)

Loss of dependency ( multiplier '18') = Rs.22,68,000/- (1,26,000 x

18)

The conventional damages of Rs.1,90,000/- awarded by the

Tribunal is confirmed.

Thus the total compensation payable would be Rs.24,58,000/-.

The interest and cost awarded by the Tribunal are confirmed.

12. Coming to the apportionment, I am of the opinion that this

reduction should not affect the minors' shares. Thus the compensation

awarded is apportioned as follows:-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

(i) The first petitioner/husband is allotted a sum of Rs.9,58,000/-

with interest and costs awarded by the Tribunal.

(ii) The minors will get a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- each. The shares

of the minors are directed to be deposited in an interest bearing fixed deposit

in any one of the nationalised banks till they attain majority and the first

petitioner is permitted to withdraw the interest once in six months for

maintenance of the minors. The first petitioner is permitted to withdraw the

entire compensation that has been apportioned to him along with accrued

interest and costs.

13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.

No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

09.12.2021

Index:Yes / No Speaking / Non-Speaking order vsg

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.3426 of 2021

vsg

To

1. The Special District Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Dharmapuri.

CMA No.3426 of 2021 And C.M.P.No. 19775 of 2021

09.12.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis