Madras High Court
M.Semathamma vs The Managing Director on 10 December, 2021
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
1.M.Semathamma
2.M.Mathizhagan
3.M.Karunakaran
4.M.Anbu .. Appellants
Vs.
The Managing Director
Metropolitan Transport Corporation
Anna salai, Chennai-2. .. Respondent
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 10.08.2012 made
in M.C.O.P.No.3900 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
XVI Additional District Court, Chennai.
For Appellants : Mr.K.Varadha Kamaraj
For Respondent : Mr.K.Moorthy
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
JUDGMENT
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 10.08.2012 made in
M.C.O.P.No.3900 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
XVI Additional District Court, Chennai.
2.The appellants are claimants in M.C.O.P.No.3900 of 2010 on the file
of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, XVI Additional District Court, Chennai.
They filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as
compensation for the death of one Murugesan, who died in the accident that
took place on 15.10.2010.
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 bus belonging to the respondent/Transport Corporation and
directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.3,45,000/- as compensation to the
appellants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that there
are four dependants of the deceased and the Tribunal erred in deducting 1/3rd
instead of 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased. The deceased was
aged 59 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal erred in applying
multiplier '5' instead of multiplier '9'. The Tribunal has not granted any
enhancement towards future prospects. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal
towards loss of consortium, loss of love and affection and funeral expenses
are meagre and prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent/Transport Corporation contended that the deceased was aged 59
years at the time of accident and the Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier
'5'. The appellants 2 to 4 are major and married sons of the deceased
Murugesan and hence, they are not entitled to any compensation. The total
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are 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 respondent/Transport Corporation and
perused the entire materials available on record.
8.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of the
appellants that the deceased was a sewerage worker at the time of accident
and was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month. To prove their contention,
they examined one Alwin Raj as P.W.3 and marked the salary slip of the
deceased as Ex.P7. The Tribunal considering the same, fixed a sum of
Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased. The deceased was
aged 59 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal applied multiplier '5',
which is not correct. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported
in 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 SC (Sarla Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation),
the correct multiplier applicable is '9'. There are four dependants of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
deceased. The Tribunal erred in deducting 1/3rd instead of 1/4th towards
personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, 1/4th has to be deducted
towards personal expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal did not grant any
enhancement towards future prospects. The appellants are entitled to 10%
enhancement towards future prospects. Thus, the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal towards loss of dependency is modified to Rs.7,12,800/-
(Rs.8,000/- + 800 [Rs.8,000/- X 10%] X 12 X 9 X 3/4). The sum of
Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of
consortium and funeral expenses are meagre and hence, the same are hereby
enhanced to Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. The Tribunal has not
awarded any amount towards loss of estate and hence, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is
awarded towards loss of estate. A sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
towards loss of love and affection is just and reasonable and hence, the same
is hereby confirmed. Though the appellants 2 to 4 are major and married sons
of the deceased, they are also legal heirs of the deceased and hence, they are
entitled to compensation.
9.It is well settled that the Tribunal and the Courts have to award just
compensation. Though the claimants have claimed lesser compensation, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
Courts have power to grant just compensation more than the amount claimed
by the claimants. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
modified as follows:
S.No Description Amount Amount awarded Award
awarded by by this Court confirmed or
Tribunal (Rs) enhanced or
(Rs) granted or
reduced
1. Loss of 3,20,000 7,12,800 Enhanced
dependency
2. Loss of love 10,000 10,000 Confirmed
and affection
3. Loss of 10,000 40,000 Enhanced
consortium
4. Funeral 5,000 15,000 Enhanced
expenses
5. Loss of estate - 15,000 Granted
Total 3,45,000 7,92,800 Enhanced by
Rs.4,47,800/-
10.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.3,45,000/- is hereby enhanced to
Rs.7,92,800/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of deposit. The appellants are directed to pay the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
necessary court fee on the enhanced award amount. The respondent/Transport
Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount now
determined by this Court along with interest and costs, less the amount
already deposited, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the appellants are
permitted to withdraw their respective share of the award amount now
determined by this Court as per the apportionment fixed by the Tribunal
along with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any, already
withdrawn. No costs.
10.12.2021
Index : Yes / No
kj
To
1.The XVI Judge
Additional District Court
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal)
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section
High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
kj
C.M.A.No.2124 of 2014
10.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
