Madras High Court

National Insurance Company Ltd vs Krishnamurthy on 17 February, 2021

                                                                             CMA No.3437 of 2012

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  Dated 17.02.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

                                             CMA.No.3437 of 2012 and
                                                M.P.No.1 of 2012


                       National Insurance Company Ltd.
                       66, Greams Road,
                       Chennai 600 008.                    ... Appellant/2nd respondent

                                                Vs.

                       1. Krishnamurthy

                       2. Jayagandham                      ... 1,2 respondents/claimants

                       3. Arumugam                         ... 3rd respondent/first respondent


                                      This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under

                       Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and

                       judgment dated 30.04.2012 passed in M.C.O.P.No.428 of 2009 by the

                       Principal Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

                       Tindivanam.




                       Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                CMA No.3437 of 2012

                                      For Appellant          : Mr.S.S.Vadivel

                                      For I, II respondent   : No appearance

                                      For III respondent     : Notice

                                                      JUDGMENT

Aggrieved over the orders passed by the Tribunal, the

insurance company is before this court to scale down the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal.

2. The claimants have filed a claim petition before the

Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the death of their

son Natarajan in a road accident that took place on 08.03.2009.

3. The brief case of the claimants is as follows: On

08.03.2009 at about 2.00hours, the deceased Natarajan was travelling as

a pillion rider in a motorcycle bearing registration No.TN-07-BB 8461

and while the vehicle was nearing Opposite to Unkle Sams Kitchen,

Giundy five furlang road, the rider of the motorcycle has ridden the

vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, thereby the deceased fell down

from the motorcycle. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

riding of the rider of motorcycle the cause of accident and since the first

respondent/ owner of the vehicle insured his motorcycle with the

second respondent/ insurance company, both of them are liable to pay

compensation.

4. The claim petition was resisted by the second respondent

by filing counter affidavit.

5. Before Tribunal, first claimant and one another witness

were examined as PW1 and PW2 respectively and Ex.P1 to Ex.P10

were marked. On the side of the respondents, no oral and documentary

evidence was adduced.

6. After analysing the evidence on record, the Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs.13,90,000/- as compensation to the claimants

under various heads as extracted hereunder.

                                   Sl              Heads              Amount in
                                   No                                   Rs.
                                   1    Loss of dependency            12,80,000
                                        (10000x12 - 1/3 x 16)

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

Sl Heads Amount in No Rs.

                                   2    Love and affection           1,00,000
                                        Rs.50,000/- each
                                   3    Transportation charges         5,000
                                   4    Funeral expenses               5,000
                                  Total                   13,90,000

Aggrieved over the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the

insurance company has filed the present appeal to scale down the

compensation.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and I have

perused the materials on record.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant

submitted that on the date of accident the deceased was a bachelor and

hence 50% of the income of the deceased should be deducted towards

his personal expenses. He further submitted that the Tribunal has taken

the age of the mother of the deceased for calculating pecuniary loss and

since the mother's age was 40, the proper multiplier is 15, but the

Tribunal has wrongly adopted multiplier '16'. He also submitted that

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

though a salary certificate was produced to show that the deceased was

earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month, the employer, who has given

the salary certificate was not examined to support the above material

and that the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded to the parents of

the deceased towards " Love and affection " is highly excessive and

therefore, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal has to be scaled

down.

9. Now the point for consideration is whether the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal has to be scaled down.

10. Point

It is contended by the claimants that the deceased was

working as a car driver in a private concern and earning a sum of

Rs.10,000/- per month. However, no proof of income was adduced by

the claimants. Therefore, a sum of Rs.8,000/- is fixed as monthly

income of the deceased. As per the decision of the Constitution Bench

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance

Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (2)

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

TN MAC 609 (SC), 40% should be added towards future prospects.

The deceased was aged 25 years on the date of accident and therefore,

proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is ' 18 ', as per per

the decision rendered in Sarla Varma and others vs. Delhi Transport

Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. In the

instant case, the deceased was died as a bachelor. Therefore, as per the

decision of the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of

India in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and

others reported in 2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC), when a person died as a

bachelor, 50% of income should be deducted towards personal expenses

of the deceased. Thus, loss of dependency is calculated as 8000+ 3200

x12x18= 24,19,200 (-) 50% = 12,09,600/-. Accordingly a sum of

Rs.12,09,600/- is awarded towards " Loss of dependency ". Apart

from this amount, the claimants are also entitled to Rs.40,000/- each

towards " loss of love and affection " and Rs.15,000/- Rs.15,000/-

towards "loss of estate" and "funeral expenses" respectively. The

revised compensation awarded under various heads is extracted

hereunder.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

Sl. Heads Compensation Compensation No Awarded by the enhanced/ Tribunal Awarded by this court 1 Loss of dependency 12,80,000 12,09,600 2 Love and affection 1,00,000 80,000 3 Transportation 5,000 -

charges 4 Funeral expenses 5,000 15,000 5 Loss of estate - 15,000 Total 13,90,000 13,19,600

This amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the

date of claim petition till the date of deposit. It is represented by the

counsel for the appellant that as per the order of this court dated

22.01.2013 in M.P.No.1 of 2012, the entire compensation awarded by

the Tribunal has already been deposited by them and the petitioners

were permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.5,70,000/- with accrued

interest and costs. Therefore, the insurance company/appellant is at

liberty to withdraw the excess amount paid by them, over and above the

revised compensation awarded by this court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA No.3437 of 2012

11. In the result,