Madras High Court
The Manager vs C.Nagarani on 10 December, 2021
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 10.12.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
C.M.A.(MD).No.809 of 2019
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.10481 of 2019
The Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
Sree Sree Maural, 2nd Floor,
New No.41, 8th Street,
Tatabad, Coimbatore. ...Appellant/2nd Respondent
Vs.
Prabaharan (Died) ...
1.C.Nagarani
2.Chinnakalai
3.C.Balaji ...R-1 to R-3/Petitioners
4.V.Rajamani ...R-4/1st Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree, dated 09.06.2017
passed in M.C.O.P.No.371 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Kulithalai and allow the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
For Appellant :Mr.K.Gokul
For R-1 to R-3 :Mr.S.V.Sakkarapani
For R-4 :No appearance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
ORDER
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the
Judgment and Decree, dated 09.06.2017 in M.C.O.P.No.371 of 2007 passed
by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Judge, Kulithalai
2.It is a case of fatal accident. On 30.01.2007 morning at 02.00 a.m.,
the deceased Prabaharan who is son of 1st and 2nd respondents herein was
travelling along with his friends in a Mini-Van bearing Regn.No.TN-22-
AL-0121, Trichy to Pudukkottai main road, near Ramagoundanpatti, a lorry
bearing Regn.No.TN-30-Y-0919 drove by its driver with rash and negligent
manner and dashed against the Mini Van. Due to the accident, the deceased
Prabaharan succumbed to death.
3.The claimants have filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.371 of 2007
on the file of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kulithalai,
seeking compensation.
4.Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants four witnesses were
examined as P.W.1 to P.W.4 and marked two documents as Exs.P.1 & Ex.P.2
and R.W.1 was examined and Ex.R.1 was marked and Ex.X.1 was marked.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5.The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidences and the arguments of the counsel for the claimants and the
respondent and also on appreciating the evidences on record, directed the
appellant/Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.9,49,000/-as compensation.
Aggrieved by the said order, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been
filed.
6.Heard on either side. Perused the material documents available on
record.
7.The respondents 1 to 3 herein are claimants have filed a claim
petition for claiming compensation for the death of the son Prabaharan of the
1st and 2nd respondents herein, but, he died after 3 years from the date of
accident. The accident was occurred in the year 2007 and he died in the year
2010.
8.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company
contended that his death was not due to the accident, so, the
appellant/insurance company is not liable to pay compensation. But the
claimants have clearly proved that after the accident, the deceased has
continuously taken treatment from the year 2007 till his death.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9.In the order in M.C.O.P.No.371 of 2007, the tribunal has discussed
the evidence of P.W.3 and also P.W.4/Doctor. The relevant portion of the
paragraph Nos.10 & 11 are extracted hereunder:
“kDjhuh; jug;gpy; kJiu uh[h[p
kUj;Jtkizapy; gjpT vOj;juhf gzpGhpAk;
fUzhepjp vd;gth; k.rh.3Mf tprhhpf;fg;gl;Ls;shh;.
mth; jd;Dila rhl;rpaj;jpy; rhiy tpgj;J
rk;ke;jkhf 30.01.2007k; Njjp rpd;df;fhis kfd;
gpughfud; vd;gth; cs; Nehahspahf
mDkjpf;fg;gl;L 10.05.2007k; Njjp rpfpl;irapypUe;J
tpLtpf;fg;gl;lhh; vd;Wk;> Nkw;gb egUf;F rpfpl;ir
toq;fpajw;fhd rpfpl;ir Nfhg;G fhl;rp rhd;whtzk;
vf;];.1 Mf FwpaPL nra;ag;gl;Ls;sjhfTk; rhl;rpak;
mspj;Js;shh;. mij epUgzk; nra;Ak; tifapy;
lhf;lh; nry;tuh[; k.rh.4Mf tprhhpf;fg;gl;Ls;shh;.
mth; jd;Dila rhl;rpaj;jpy; Mtzj;jpd;
mbg;gilapy; jhd; rhl;rpak; mspg;gjhfTk;>
mtUila rhl;rpaj;jpy; Fwpg;ghf gpughfuDf;F
KJF jz;by; b.9> B.10 vYk;Gfs; Kwpe;J> %l;L
eYtp ,Lg;Gf;F fPo; nray; ,oe;J
fhzg;gl;ljw;fhf rpfpl;ir mspf;fg;gl;Ls;sjhfTk;>
NkYk; gpughfudpd; ,lJ Nky; gFjpapy; vYk;G
KwpT Vw;gl;L rpfpl;ir mspf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;Wk;>
rpfpl;irapypUe;j fhyj;jpy; rpfpl;irapy; ve;j
Kd;Ndw;wKk; Vw;glhky; tpLtpf;fg;gl;Ls;shh; vd;Wk;>
mtUf;F Vw;gl;Ls;s Cdk; epue;ju Cdk; vd;Wk;>
vjph;fhyj;jpy; kDjhuUf;F Vw;gl;Ls;s fhaq;fspd;
fhuzkhf mtUf;F ve;jtpj Kd;Ndw;wKk;
Vw;gLtjw;Fhpa tha;g;G ,y;iy vd;Wk;> mtUf;F
Vw;gl;l Cdk; Fiwtjw;Fk; tha;gG ; ,y;iy vd;Wk;>
kDjhuUf;F KJF jz;Ltlj;jpy; vYk;G KwpT
Vw;gl;ljhy; vOe;J elkhl KbahJ vd;Wk;> gLj;j
gLf;ifahf jhd; ,Uf;f KbAk; vd;Wk;>
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
kDjhuUf;F ,aw;if cghijfs; jhdhf elf;fhJ
vd;Wk;> nraw;if Kiwapy; jhd; rhp
nra;aNtz;Lnkd;Wk;> mjd; gpd; tpisTfshy;
rpWePufk; ghjpg;gjw;F tha;g;G cs;sJ vd;Wk;>
gLj;j gLf;ifahf ,Ug;gjhy; Neha; njhw;W
Vw;gLtjw;F tha;g;G cs;sJ vd;Wk;> kDjhuUf;F
Vw;gl;Ls;s fhaq;fspd; fhuzkhfTk;> cghijfs;
fhuzkhfTk; ,wg;G Vw;gLtjw;F tha;gG ; cs;sJ
vd;Wk; Fwpg;gpl;L rhl;rpak; mspj;Js;shh; vd;gJ
Fwpg;gplj;jf;fJ.
11.Vnddpy; ,JNghd;w tpgj;J tof;Ffspy;
gpNuj ghpNrhjid mwpf;if ,y;yhtpl;lhy; $l>
tpgj;jpy; ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh; rpfpl;irapypUe;J gpd;dh;
tPL jpUk;gp cly; eyf;FiwT mf;fhaj;jpdhy;
Vw;gl;L mjd; gpd; tpisthf ,wg;G Vw;gLk;
#o;epiyapy; me;egUila ,wg;G tpgj;jpdhy;
Vw;gl;L fhaj;jpdhy; Vw;gl;bUf;ff;$ba epiyapy;
me;eghpd; ,wg;gpdhy; mtiu;rhh;e;j kDjhuh;fs;
ghjpf;fg;glf;$lhJ vd;W vz;zj;jpd; mbg;gilapy;
gpNuj ghpNrhjid mwpf;if jhf;fy;
nra;ag;glhtpl;lhYk;> mjdhy; tof;F
ghjpf;fj;Njitapy;iy vd;W ,e;ePjpkd;wk; fUjpAk;>
NkYk; khz;gik nrd;id cah;ePjpkd;wk; mspj;j
jPh;gG
; iufis ,e;ePjpkd;wk; ,t;tof;fpw;F
fUj;jpy;nfhs;fpwJ.
2015-1 TNLJ CIVIL PAGE No.139
Punjab and Hariyana High Court
United India Insurance Company Limited .. Appellant
Vs.
Smithra and Others. ..Respondents
vd;w Kd;jhP ;gi
; gAk;>
2014(1)TN MAC Page No 1384
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
National Insurance Co. Ltd. No.751, Annal Salai, Chennai -2..Appellant
Vs.
Anthony alias Rakesh (Since deceased) and 4 Others ..Respondents
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM :-
Deceased sustained injuries in non-fatal accident
on 20.07.2001 and himself filed Claim petition on
26.07.2001 claiming Compensation for injuries sustained
by him – Death of deceased due to complication of
injuries during pendency of Claim Petition – Legal Heirs
impleaded and Claim Petition amended altering claim
from Rs.1,50,000 to Rs.8,00,000/- Award of
Compensation of Rs.4,30,000/-by Tribunal – Challenge
to – Appellant/Insurer contending that Claim Petition
ought to have been closed as abated after death of
original Claimant/deceased – Contention that death of
deceased has no nexus with accident, since deceased
took treatment only as out-patient and no Post-Mortem
conducted – Whether death of deceased, consequence of
injuries sustained in accident – Deceased continuously
taking Medical treatment as sustantiated by Exs.P.4 to P.
10 – which showed presence of infection as corroborated
by evidence of P.W.3. Merely because Post-Mortem
Report not produced, it cannot be said that death had no
nexus with injury particularly when death can be inferred
from other materials”.
vd;w Kd;jhP ;gi
; gAk; Rl;bf;fhl;b thjplg;gl;lJ.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10.From the above, the claimants have clearly proved that the death
was only due to multiple injuries sustained by him at the time of accident.
11.The appellant has also pointed out the quantum the tribunal has
fixed monthly income as Rs.4,000/- and out of which 50% for future
prospectus. Since the deceased was a bachelor 50% to be deducted for
personal expenses. So, his monthly income after deduction of Rs.3,000/-.
Loss of income = Rs.3000 x 18 x 12 = 6,48,000/-
12.On hearing both sides, this Court is inclined to modify the award
amount of compensation passed by the Tribunal.
13.Accordingly, the claimants are entitled for compensation as follows:
S. Description Amount awarded by Award
confirmed /
No.
Tribunal this Court enhanced /
granted
1. For Loss of income Rs. 8,64,000/- Rs. 6,48,000/- modified
[Rs.3000x18x12]
2. Loss of love and affection Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 80,000/- modified
3. For loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- confirmed
4. For funeral expenses Rs. 25,000 /- Rs. 25,000/- confirmed
5 For Transport charges Rs. 10,000/- confirmed
Total Rs. 9,49,000/- Rs. 7,73,000/-
with interest at 7.5% p.a., as awarded by the Tribunal, from the date of claim
petition till the date of realization.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
14.In view of the said modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
partly allowed, and the award amount of Rs.9,49,000/-granted by the learned
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kulithalai, is reduced to Rs.7,73,000/-with
7.5%. The appellant/insurance company is directed to deposit the entire
award amount, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of copy
of the order. After depositing, the 1st claimant is entitled to withdraw a sum of
Rs.4 lakhs with interest and the 2nd claimant is entitled to withdraw a sum of
Rs.3 lakhs with interest and the 3rd claimant is entitled to withdraw a sum of
Rs.73,000/-. If the appellant/insurance company deposited the excess
amount is to be refunded to the insurance company. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index :Yes/No 10.12.2021
Internet:Yes/No
ksa
Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Kulithalai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.ANANTHI, J.
ksa
Order made in
C.M.A.(MD).No.809 of 2019
10.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
