Madras High Court
Kokilalakshmi vs Saminathan on 10 December, 2021
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 10.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
[video conferencing]
1.Kokilalakshmi
2.Minor C.Rohit
(Minor 2nd appellant represented by the next friend/
Mother Kokilalakshmi, 1st appellant herein)
3.Aarayee ... Appellants / Petitioners
Vs.
1.Saminathan
(R1 remained ex-parte before Tribunal.
Hence, notice to R1 is dispensed with)
2.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore Division) Limited,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Having office at Chennimalai Road,
Erode – 11. ... Respondents / Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Award and Decree dated 26.02.2015
made in M.C.O.P.No.179 of 2013, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal / Sub Court, Perundurai.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
For Appellants : Mr.M.Guruprasad
For R1 : Set Ex-parte before the Tribunal
For R2 : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed, challenging the award
passed in M.C.O.P.No.179 of 2013, dated 26.02.2015, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Perundurai.
2. The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.179 of 2013, on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tribunal, Subordinate Court,
Perundurai. They have filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Chidambaram, who died
in the accident that took place on 25.02.2013.
3. The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent
driving by the driver of the bus, 1st respondent herein and directed the 2nd
respondent/Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.5,95,400/- as
compensation to the appellants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
4. Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants/claimants have come out with the present Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants
contended that, at the time of accident, the deceased was a Plumber working
in National Plumbing Works, aged about 30 years and was earning a sum of
Rs.15,000/- per month. But, the Tribunal has fixed a meagre sum of
Rs.3,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased and taking 30%
future prospects, which is very meagre. The Tribunal has not awarded any
amount towards transportation and loss of estate and the same may be
awarded. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meagre and
hence, the learned counsel prayed for enhancement of compensation. In
support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the appellants relied on the
ruling of this Court reported in 2014 (1) TN MAC 613 [Branch Manager,
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co., Ltd., vs. N.Ramalingam].
6. Per contra, Mr.K.J.Sivakumar, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd
respondent/Transport Corporation contended that the appellants have failed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
to prove the avocation and income of the deceased by producing valid
documents. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to avocation
and income, the sum of Rs.3,000/- per month fixed by the Tribunal as
notional income of the deceased and taking 30% future prospects, is
excessive. The Tribunal, considering the entire materials available on record,
has awarded a sum of Rs.5,95,400/- as compensation to the appellants under
various heads, which is highly excessive. Therefore, the appellants are not
entitled for any enhancement and hence, he prayed for dismissal of the
appeal.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants as
well as the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/Transport
Corporation and perused the entire materials placed on record.
8. It is the case of the appellants/claimants that, at the time of accident,
the deceased was a Plumber working in National Plumbing Works, aged
about 30 years and was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. The
appellants/claimants have not proved the avocation and income of the
deceased by producing valid document. In the absence of any valid document
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
with regard to avocation and income, the Tribunal, fixed a sum of Rs.3,000/-
per month as notional income of the deceased, which is meagre and the same
is hereby enhanced to Rs.10,000/- per month. The Tribunal has rightly
applied multiplier '17' as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reported in 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC), [Sarla Verma & others Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation & another]. The Tribunal has awarded 30% towards
future prospects. The deceased was aged about 27 years at the time of
accident and as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2017
(2) TN MAC 609 (SC), [National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay
Sethi and others], the appellants are entitled to 40% amount towards future
prospects. There are three dependants of the deceased and the Tribunal has
rightly deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses. Thus, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of earning capacity is modified to
Rs.19,04,000/- {Rs.14,000/- [Rs.10,000/- + Rs.4,000/- (40% of Rs.10,000/-)]
X 12 X 17 X 2/3 }.
9. The Tribunal has awarded a meagre sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss
of consortium to the 1st appellant, and hence the same is enhanced to
Rs.40,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
love and affection to the appellants 2 and 3, who are the minor child and
mother of the deceased, which is very meagre. The appellants 2 and 3 are
entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love and affection. The
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses, which
is meagre and hence, the same is hereby enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. The
Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards transportation and loss of
estate. This Court is of the considered view that the appellants are entitled to
compensation towards transportation and loss of estate and hence,
Rs.15,000/- each is hereby granted towards transportation and loss of estate,
respectively.
10. It is well settled that the Tribunal and the Courts have to award
“just compensation”. Though the claimants have claimed lesser
compensation, the 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:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
S. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by this confirmed or
Tribunal Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of earnings Rs.5,30,400/- Rs.19,04,000/- Enhanced
2. Funeral expenses Rs.10,000/- Rs.15,000/- Enhanced
3. Loss of love and Rs.30,000/- Rs.80,000/- Enhanced
affection
4. Transportation --- Rs.15,000/- Granted
5. Loss of estate --- Rs.15,000/- Granted
6. Loss of Consortium to Rs.25,000/- Rs.40,000/- Enhanced
the 1st appellant
Total Rs.5,95,400/- Rs.20,69,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.14,73,600/-
11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.5,95,400/- is hereby enhanced to
Rs.20,69,000/- [Rupees Twenty Lakhs and Sixty Nine Thousand only] together
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of deposit. The 2nd respondent/Transport Corporation is directed to
deposit the award amount now determined by this Court, along with interest
and costs, as awarded by the Tribunal less the amount already deposited, if
any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.179 of 2013, on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Perundurai. On such deposit,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
the appellants 1 & 3 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares of the
total award amount now determined by this Court, as per the apportionment
fixed by the Tribunal, along with proportionate interest and costs, as awarded
by the Tribunal, less the amount if any, already withdrawn, by making
necessary applications before the Tribunal. The share of the minor/2nd
appellant is directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks, in
any interest bearing Fixed Deposit Scheme till the minor/2 nd appellant attains
majority. On such deposit, the 1st appellant, being the mother of the minor/2nd
appellant, is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months
for the welfare of the minor/2nd appellant. The appellants are directed to pay
the necessary Court fee if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation. In
other respects, the Award of the Tribunal shall stand confirmed. There shall
be no order as to costs in this appeal.
10.12.2021
ssi
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order : Yes/ No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
To:
1.The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Perundurai.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
S.KANNAMMAL, J.
ssi
C.M.A.No.301 of 2017
10.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
