Madras High Court
R. Suguna vs M. Murugan on 4 February, 2021
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.2615 of 2019
1.R. Suguna
2.R. Mukesh
3.R. Sathiyavani .. Appellants
Vs.
1.M. Murugan
(R1 remained exparte before the Tribunal)
2.Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Rais Tower, 2nd Floor,
Flat No.2054, 2nd Avenue,
Anna Nagar,
Chennai 600 040. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 22.10.2018, made
in M.C.O.P. No.688 of 2014, on the file of the Special Sub Court No.2, Small
Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Chennai.
___
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
For Appellants : Mr.N.M.Elumalai
For Respondents : Mr.S.Arunkumar (For R2)
JUDGMENT
This matter is heard through "Video Conferencing".
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of the
compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 22.10.2018, made
in M.C.O.P. No.688 of 2014, on the file of the Special Sub Court No.2, Small
Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Chennai.
2.The appellants filed M.C.O.P. No.688 of 2014, on the file of the
Special Sub Court No.2, Small Causes Court, (Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal), Chennai, claiming a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation for
the death of one Raja who died in the accident that took place on 14.11.2013.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
driver of the TATA Ace belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the 2nd
respondent as insurer of the vehicle to pay a sum of Rs.8,44,400/- as
compensation to the appellants.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts granted by the award dated
22.10.2018, made in M.C.O.P. No.688 of 2014, the appellants have come out
with the present appeal.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that at
the time of accident, the deceased was aged 48 years and was a Vegetable
Vendor, earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. The appellants have
produced Ex.P3 – post mortem report to prove the age of the deceased and
Ex.P6 – rental agreement of the shop of the deceased to prove his avocation
and income. The Tribunal without considering the evidence of 1st appellant/
wife of the deceased as P.W.1 and Exs.P3 & P6, erroneously fixed only a sum
of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income, fixed age of the deceased as 53
years, applied multiplier '11' as against the correct multiplier '13' and granted
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
only 10% enhancement towards future prospects, instead of granting 25%.
The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of love and affection.
The amount awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are also meagre and
prayed for enhancement of the compensation.
6.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-
Insurance Company contended that the appellants failed to prove the age of
the deceased. In the absence of any material evidence, the tribunal considering
the death certificate marked as Ex.P7 and the averments in the claim petition,
rightly fixed the age of the deceased as 53 years. In the absence of any
materials to prove the avocation and income of the deceased, the Tribunal
fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income, which is not meagre.
The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are not meagre. The
appellants have not made out any case for enhancement of the compensation
and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
2nd respondent-Insurance Company and perused the materials available on
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
record.
8.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the contention of the
appellants that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 48 years.
However, the appellants have claimed in the claim petition that the deceased
was aged 53 years. The Tribunal, considering the death certificate, marked as
Ex.P7, issued by the Government Official based on the documents produced
by the relative of the deceased, rightly fixed the age of the deceased as 53
years. The appellants contended that the deceased was a Vegetable Vendor
and was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. They have marked Ex.P6 –
rental agreement to prove the same. The Tribunal considering the unregistered
rental agreement executed on 02.09.2002 for a period of 11 months and the
date of accident viz., 14.11.2013, rightly rejected Ex.P6 on the ground that the
unregistered rental agreement was not in force at the time of accident. In the
absence of any materials to prove the avocation and income of the deceased,
the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month as notional income and the
same is meagre. The accident is of the year 2013. Considering the year of
accident and nature of work done by the deceased, a sum of Rs.10,000/- per
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
month is fixed as notional income. The Tribunal rightly granted 10%
enhancement towards future prospects, applied the multiplier '11' and
deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. Hence, the
amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency is modified to
Rs.9,68,000/- {[Rs.10,000/- + Rs.1,000/- (10% of Rs.10,000/-)] x 12 x 11 x
2/3}. The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of love and
affection. The appellants 2 and 3 being children of the deceased are entitled to
a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of love and affection. The amounts granted
by the Tribunal under other heads are just and reasonable and hence, the same are
confirmed. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as
follows:
S. No Description Amount awarded Amount Award
by Tribunal awarded by confirmed or
(Rs) this Court (Rs) enhanced or
granted
1. Loss of dependency 7,74,400/- 9,68,000/- Enhanced
2. Loss of estate 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
3. Funeral expenses 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
4. Loss of consortium to 40,000/- 40,000/- Confirmed
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
1st appellant
5. Loss of love and - 40,000/- Granted
affection to appellants
2 and 3
Total 8,44,400/- 10,78,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.2,33,600/-
9.In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the amount awarded by
the Tribunal at Rs.8,44,400/- is enhanced to Rs.10,78,000/- together with
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
deposit. The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
award amount, now determined by this Court, along with interest and costs,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment, to the credit of M.C.O.P. No.688 of 2014. On such deposit, the
appellants are permitted to withdraw their share of the award amount, now
determined by this Court, along with proportionate interest and costs, as per
the ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, after adjusting the amount, if
any, already withdrawn, by filing necessary applications before the Tribunal.
No costs.
04.02.2021
Index : Yes / No
gsa
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A. No.2615 of 2019
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
To
1.The Special Subordinate Judge-II,
Small Causes Court,
(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal),
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R Section,
High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.2615 of 2019
04.02.2021
___
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
