Madras High Court
The Branch Manager vs Karthikeyan on 13 December, 2021
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
and CMP.No.18909 of 2021
The Branch Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
Rai's Tower, Plot No.2054, 2nd Avenue, 2nd Floor,
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040. ...appellant
Vs.
1. Karthikeyan
2. Jayamoorthi
3. M.Balaiya ...respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 30.10.2018 passed
in MCOP.No.388 of 2016, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional District Court, Namakkal.
For Appellant : Mrs.C.Bhuvanasundari
For Respondents
For RR1 & 2 : M/s.R.S.Sivaram (Caveator)
For R3 : No Appearance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J]
The appeal is heard through video conferencing.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated
30.10.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional
District Court, Namakkal in MCOP.No.388 of 2016.
3. The facts in brief necessary for disposal of the appeal would run
thus:
On 06.01.2016 at about 2.45 p.m., the deceased Manickam was
walking on the left side of the road at Salem-Namakkal National Highway.
At that time, a Mahindra Bolero Maxi Truck bearing Registration No.
TN-51-AB-9130, belonging to the third respondent, driven by its driver in a
rash and negligent manner, hit the deceased. Due to the impact, the
deceased sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was
taken to Government Hospital, Namakkal, but he died on the way.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
4. According to the respondents 1 and 2/claimants, the deceased was
working as a Wireman in TNEB and earning Rs.45,000/- per month, hence,
they are entitled to a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation.
5. The appellant/Insurance Company resisted the claim, disputing the
manner of accident, age, occupation and income of the deceased and their
liability to pay the compensation.
6. To substantiate the case on the side of the claimants, PW1 and
PW2 were examined and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked. On the side of
Insurance Company, neither oral evidence was adduced nor documentary
evidence was marked.
7. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence,
held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the Mahindra Bolero Maxi Truck and awarded a compensation
of Rs.33,85,300/- along with 7.5% interest and directed the Insurance
Company to pay the above compensation. Questioning the same, the
Insurance Company is before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
8. The break-up details of the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under
various heads are as follows:
S.No. Heads under which amount is Amount in Rs.
awarded by the Tribunal
1. Loss of Income 33,55,308
2. Loss of Estate 15,000
3. Funeral Expenses 15,000
Total 33,85,308
9. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company
submitted that the monthly income taken by the Tribunal for the deceased,
for calculating the Loss of Income, was on the higher side. Further, the
Tribunal has not followed the legal precedents of the Apex Court while
arriving at the quantum.
10. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the materials available on record.
11. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the deceased Manickam
met with an accident and died on 06.01.2016. At the time of the accident,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.4/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
the deceased was 52 years and working as a Wireman in TNEB. As per
Ex.P6 salary certificate, the Tribunal had rightly taken Rs.36,839/- as
monthly income of the deceased and 15% is added towards future prospects,
thus, the total income comes to Rs.42,365/- [36,839 + 5,526]. Then, 10% of
the income is deducted towards Income Tax, which works out to Rs.38,129/-
[42,365 - 4,236]. If 1/3 is deducted towards personal expenses of the
deceased, the contribution to the family would be Rs.25,419/- [38,129 -
12,710]. Considering the age of the deceased at the time of the accident,
multiplier “11” has to be applied. However, the claimants have not let in
evidence to show that even after the retirement, the deceased would be
earning the same income. So we are of the considered opinion that we have
to apply split multiplier method in this case. The Loss of Income for the
deceased in service comes to Rs.24,40,224/- [25,419 x 12 x 8] and for the
remaining period, the amount would be Rs.4,57,560/- [12,710 x 12 x 3].
Thus, the total Loss of Income comes to Rs.28,97,784/-. Accordingly, the
amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head Loss of Income is reduced
to Rs.28,97,784/-.
12. In addition to that, this Court is inclined to award Rs.80,000/- to
the claimants towards Loss of Consortium and Filial Consortium. Further,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, viz., Rs.15,000/- towards Loss of
Estate; and Rs.15,000/- towards Funeral Expenses are hereby confirmed. In
total, the claimant is entitled to Rs.30,07,784/- along with interest at the rate
of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.
Thus, the total compensation payable to the claimants is re-
calculated and tabulated below:
S. Heads under which Amount Amount
No. amount is awarded by awarded by the awarded by the
the Tribunal Tribunal in Rs. Tribunal in Rs.
1. Loss of Income 33,55,308 28,97,784
2. Loss of Estate 15,000 15,000
3. Funeral Expenses 15,000 15,000
4. Loss of Consortium and - 80,000
Filial Consortium
Total 33,85,308 30,07,784
13. 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 six weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the claimants
are permitted to withdraw the award amount, less the amount already
withdrawn, if any, together with proportionate interest and costs. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.6/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
apportionment of shares as fixed by the Tribunal to the claimants remains
unaltered. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
13.12.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
pvs
To
1. The Additional District Court,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Namakkal
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/8
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
pvs
C.M.A. No.3325 of 2021
13.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.8/8
