Madras High Court
K.Vahidha Begam vs The Commissioner on 10 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.02.2021
CORAM
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
AND
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
K.Vahidha Begam ..Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Commissioner
Corporation of Chennai,
Chennai – 600 016.
2. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
No.45, Second Line Beach,
Moores Street, Chennai -600 016. ...Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 11.01.2019 in
M.C.O.P.No.7068 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal/II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellants ::Ms. Ramya V.Rao
For Respondent ::Ex-parte for R1
Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy for R2
Page 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP,J.)
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the Judgment
and Decree dated 11.01.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.7068 of 2016 on the file
of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The case in brief is as follows:
On 22.05.2016 at about 22.45 hours, while the deceased was riding
his motor cycle bearing Reg. No.TN-02-AJ-0051 near the Port Trust
Hospital, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg. No.TN-22-CH-6234 parked the
said lorry without any indication. Hence, the deceased had dashed his two
wheeler against the said lorry resulting in the fatal accident. The first
respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.
3. Ms.Ramya V. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/claimant submitted her arguments. As per her submissions, the
Tribunal dismissed the claim stating that the deceased had consumed
Page 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
Alcohol. As per the Investigating Officer, there were two people on the
vehicle on the said date. The rider of the two wheeler alone is said to have
been under the influence of alcohol and died in the accident. The son of the
claimant was not the rider and he was a pillion rider. Therefore, the Tribunal
wrongly appreciated the facts and dismissed the case.
4. Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company has submitted his arguments. As per his submissions, the
accident occurred, because the deceased, under the influence of alcohol had
driven the two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner. Therefore, the award
of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference. Therefore, this appeal
lacks merits and it has to be dismissed.
5. Point for consideration
Whether the appellant/claimant is entitled for enhancement of the
award amount.
Page 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
6. Perused the petition and counter in MCOP.No.7068 of 2016 and
the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Judge, Small
Causes Court, Chennai and the grounds of appeal filed by the claimants
seeking enhancement.
7. On perusal of the records of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, it
is found that the Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition. The deceased
was employed as Supply Master in Kajabai Briyani. He was earning
Rs.300/- per day and on Saturday and Sunday Rs.750/- as batta per day.
Therefore, the monthly income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.12,000/- which
is reasonable. On the date of accident, the deceased was aged 21 years.
Therefore, the proper multiplier will be 18. The deceased was not married.
Therefore, out of Rs.12,000/-, half of it has to be deducted towards personal
expenses. Loss of Earning(Pecuniary Loss) is arrived at as follows:
Income fixed :: Rs.12,000/-
Less: 1/2th towards
Personal expenses:: Rs.12,000/- x 1/2 :: Rs.6000/-
Page 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
Monthly Contribution to the
family :: (Rs.12,000 – Rs.6000/-)
:: Rs.6000/-
8. On the date of death, the deceased was aged 21 years. Therefore,
towards future prospects only 40% of the income could be added as per the
ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in National Insurance Co.
Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 609 (SC).
Future Prospects :: 12000 (Monthly income) x
40%(Future Prospects) = 4800
Monthly Contribution to the family :: 6000+4800=10800
Annual Contribution :: 10800x12 = 1,29,600
Taking the multiplier as 18 for the age group upto 25 years
Pecuniary Loss :: Rs.1,29,600 x18
:: Rs.23,32,800/-
Page 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
9. Considering the age of the deceased, the mother being the
claimant is entitled to claim under the head “loss of Love and Affection”.
Hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.40,000/- under the said head. A sum
of Rs.40,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate and another sum of
Rs.15,000/- is awarded towards funeral expenses and yet another sum of
Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards Transportation. Thus, total compensation to
be awarded is Rs.24,37,800/- which is tabulated below:
Loss of earning (pecuniary loss) Rs.23,32,800.00
Loss of love and affection Rs. 40,000.00
Loss of estate Rs. 40,00.00
Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000.00
Transportation Rs. 10,000.00
---------------------
Total Rs.24,37,800.00
---------------------
Page 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
10. The Tribunal has held that the deceased rode the motorcycle in a
rash and negligent manner under the influence of alcohol. Therefore, this
Court fixed 70% of the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.
11. Out of the above said sum of Rs.24,37,800/-, 70% of the amount
has to be deducted towards contributory negligence of the deceased. In
effect, the appellant/claimant is entitled to a total sum of Rs.7,31,340/- as
compensation for the death of the deceased, which shall carry 7.5% interest
from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment. As
regards the proportion of the share of the above fixed compensation of
Rs.7,31,340/- (Rupees seven lakhs thirty one thousand and three hundred
only) is concerned, the appellant being the mother of the deceased, is
entitled to a sum of Rs.7,32,000/-(Rounded off).
12. The Point for consideration is answered in favour of the
appellant/claimant against the respondent/Insurance Company.
Page 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
13. In the result, the impugned order and decree of the Tribunal
passed in M.C.O.P.No.7068 of 2016 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, II Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai, are set aside and the
present appeal filed by the appellant/claimant is partly allowed. The
appellant/claimant is entitled to get the compensation of Rs.7,32,000/- as
apportioned above, which shall be paid by the second respondent/Insurance
Company within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment and the second respondent/Insurance Company. The appellant
is directed to pay appropriate Court fees within a period of two months,
failing which, she is not entitled to claim interest on the award amount. No
costs.
(R.P.S.J.) (S.S.K.J.)
dh 10.02.2021
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking order/Non Speaking order
Page 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
II Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
Page 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
R.SUBBIAH, J.
AND
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
dh
C.M.A.No.49 of 2021
10.02.2021
Page 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
