Madras High Court
G.Sumathi @ Ulagammal vs P.Chandrasekaran on 1 February, 2021
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
1.G.Sumathi @ Ulagammal
2.G.Ramprasad
3.Selvi.G.Bapitha
4.Palaniammal ... Appellants / Petitioners
Vs.
1.P.Chandrasekaran
2.The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Branch Office,
No.6, West Masi Street,
Madurai - 1. ... Respondents / Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173
of Motor Vehicles Act, against the Judgment and Decree, dated
06.07.2007 in M.C.O.P. No.2493 of 2004, on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Madurai.
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
For Appellants : Mr.M.Venugopal
For 1st Respondent : No Appearance
For 2nd Respondent : Mr.D.Sivaraman
JUDGMENT
Being dissatisfied with the quantum awarded by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal / Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, in
M.C.O.P. No. 2493 of 2004, dated 06.07.2007, the claimants as
appellants, have filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking
enhancement of compensation.
2.The claim petition M.C.O.P.No.2493 of 2004 was filed by
the wife, children and mother of the deceased Govindan, who died in a
motor vehicle accident that had taken place on 01.04.2004. The case of
the claimants is that on 01.04.2004 at about 8.30 p.m., the deceased along
with his neighbour one Jeya Gurunathan, were returning from Koodal
Nagar to their house situated at Dinamani Nagar, riding their bicycles on
the extreme left side of the road. It is alleged that an Ambassador Car
bearing Registration No.TN G 5909 which was coming in a high speed
and also driven in a negligent manner hit against the deceased and he died
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
on the spot. The Claimants would further state that the deceased was
50 years old at the time of accident and he was working in Madura Coats
and he got Voluntary Retirement from service and he was earning
Rs.8,000/- per month, by doing Finance Business and Real Estate Broker
Business.
3.The claim was resisted by the appellant-insurance company
disputing the manner of accident. It is their case that the deceased who
was riding the bicycle from opposite direction, lost his balance and came
to the middle of the road and hit against the car. It is also stated that the
compensation claimed was excessive and exorbitant.
4.Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimants, two
witnesses were examined and 5 documents were marked. No oral or
documentary evidence was marked on the side of the respondents.
5. Upon consideration of evidence, the Tribunal came to the
conclusion that the accident had happened only due to the negligence on
the part of the driver of the car and awarded a compensation of
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
Rs.1,28,000/- with 7.5% interest per annum. Challenging the award, the
present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed, seeking enhancement
of compensation.
6.Mr.M.Venugopal, learned counsel for the appellants,
contended that the income fixed by the Tribunal at the rate of Rs.15,000/-
per annum is meagre and the Tribunal ought to have fixed a sum of
Rs.8,000/- per month as deceased income. It is also contended that two
of the claimants were unmarried and mother of the deceased was also a
senior citizen, the Tribunal failed to note that aspect and fixing the
compensation.
7.Per contra, Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the second
respondent contended that the Tribunal has rightly awarded the
compensation and no material is placed before this Court for enhancing
the compensation in this appeal.
8. Heard the rival submissions made on either side and
perused the materials on record.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
9.Though the Claimants stated that the deceased died at the
age of 50 years, Ex.P.3 shows that he was 54 years at the time of accident.
The contentions of the Claimants that the deceased was doing Finance
Business and also doing Real Estate Business, was not proved before the
Tribunal, as no documentary evidence was filed in support of the said
contentions. So the Tribunal fixed the notional income at the rate of
Rs.15,000/- per annum, after deducting 1/3rd towards his personal
expenses, awarded a sum of Rs.1,11,000/- by applying multiplier '11'.
10.As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the
appellant, the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is meagre and to be
enhanced. By taking the income of Rs.36,000/- per annum and after
deducting Rs.12,000/- towards his personal expenses, the contribution to
the family would come to Rs.24,000/- per annum. Ex.P.3 shows that the
deceased died at the age of 54 years and as per the decision of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Others Vs.
Delhi Transport Corporation & Another, the correct multiplier to be
adopted is '11'. Therefore, this Court has awarded a sum of Rs.2,64,000/-
for loss of income. Considering the age of the dependants, this Court
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
awards a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium to the first
Claimant, Rs.30,000/- for love and affection to the Claimants 2 to 4 and
Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate.
In total, this Court has awards a sum of Rs.3,64,000/- with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum for the enhanced award amount.
11. The award of the Tribunal is modified as under:-
S.No. Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. For Loss of 1,11,000 2,64,000 enhanced
Income
2. For Loss of 10,000 40,000 enhanced
Consortium
3. For Love and 5,000 30,000 enhanced
affection
4. For Funeral 2,000 15,000 enhanced
expenses
5. For Loss of - 15,000 awarded
Estate
Total Rs.1,28,000 Rs.3,64,000/- By enhancing a
sum of
Rs.2,36,000/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
12.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly
allowed, enhancing the award of the Tribunal from Rs.1,28,000/- to
Rs.3,64,000/-. The award amount of the Tribunal shall carry interest
at the rate of 7.5% per annum and the enhanced award amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The appellants/claimants
are directed to pay the additional Court Fees, if any, within a period of
two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The
second respondent shall deposit the modified award amount with 6% per
annum interest and costs, within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount already deposited, if
any. On such deposit being made, the claimants are permitted to
withdraw their share in the award amount, less the amount already
withdrawn, if any, together with proportionate accrued interest and costs,
as per the ratio of apportionment made by the Tribunal, by filing formal
application before the Tribunal. No costs.
01.02.2021
Internet:Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
rm
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
K.KALYANASUNDARAM.J.,
rm
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.
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
cum – Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,
Madurai.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
C.M.A(MD)No.317 of 2010
01.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
