Madras High Court
The Manager vs Shobana on 17 February, 2021
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
The Manager,
M/s.National Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Balaji Tower, 2nd Floor,
No.11, Ramakrishna Road, Salem ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Shobana
2.Minor.Janani
3.Minor.Ranjith
(Respondents 2 and 3 represented
by mother and natural guardian 1st respondent)
4.Deivanai
5.Chinnasamy
6.S.Rajamani ... Respondents
PRAYER: This Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 04.07.2019 passed in
M.C.O.P.No.465 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal/Principal District Judge, Karur.
For appellant : Ms.P.Malini
For R1 to R5 : Mr.K.Suresh Kumar
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to set aside the
Judgment and Decree dated 04.07.2019 passed in M.C.O.P.No.465 of 2017
on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal District Judge,
Karur.
2.The brief facts of the case is that on 12.07.2017 one Thangaraj was
riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-47-AA-4062 on Karur to
Erode main road from east to west, at that time, a bus bearing Registration
No.TN-34-X-3799 was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner
from the opposite direction and dashed against the motorcycle, as a result of
which, the said Thangaraj died instantaneously. Against which, the
respondents 1 to 5/claimants who are legal heirs of the deceased Thangaraj
filed a petition in M.C.O.P.No.465 of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal , District Judge, Karur, claiming a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as
compensation. After hearing the oral and documentary evidence, the learned
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.21,37,584/- along with interest. Against the
said award, the insurance company filed the above appeal challenging the
quantum of compensation.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
3.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned
counsel for the respondents 1 to 5 and perused the materials available on
record.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
respondents 1 to 5/claimants have not produced any proof to show that the
deceased Thangaraj earned Rs.50,000/- per month, for which, learned
counsel for the respondents 1 to 5 would submit that the deceased was doing
textile business and in order to prove the textile business, the claimants have
produced Firm Registration Certificate of Gold Yarn Traders which was
marked as Ex.P8 and Ex.P9 Form-A of the said firm. But the claimants have
not proved the income of the said firm by examination of other partners
found in Ex.P9. However, in the absence of any proof to show the income of
the deceased, the Court fixed the notional income of the deceased as
Rs.11,000/- per month and therefore, I am not inclined to interfere under the
head of loss of income. As far as loss of love and affection is concerned, this
Court is of the view that the award passed by the Tribunal is little bit high.
Since the loss of consortium has been given to his wife, no need to give
compensation under the head of loss of love and affection. As far as the
minor children are concerned, they would entitle to get Rs.50,000/- each and
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
the mother and father of the deceased would entitle to get Rs.25,000/- each
under the head of loss of love and affection.
5. In view of the above, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under the
head of loss of love and affection is reduced from Rs.3,25,000/- to
Rs. 1,50,000/-.Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs.19,62,584/-.
6.Except the award under the head of loss of love and affection, the
compensation under other heads are not interfered with. Accordingly, the
award passed by the Tribunal is reduced from Rs.21,37,584/- to 19,62,584/-.
So far as the interest is concerned, the rate of interest i.e., 7.5% p.a., fixed by
the Tribunal is confirmed. The appellant / Insurance Company would submit
that the entire amount has already been deposited. Therefore, the respondents
1,4 and 5/ claimants are permitted to withdraw their shares with interest as
apportioned by the Tribunal. The shares of the respondents 2 and 3/minors
shall be deposited in a Nationalised Bank in Fixed Deposit till they attain
majority. The interest accruing on such deposit is permitted to be withdrawn
by the 1st respondent/mother of minors, once in three months directly from
the bank. After attaining majority, it is for the minor claimants to withdraw
their respective shares by making necessary application before the Tribunal
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
discharging guardianship. The balance excess amount shall be withdrawn by
the appellant/Insurance Company.
7. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.02.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
msa
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 Accident Claims Tribunal
Principal District Judge, Karur.
2.The Record Keeper,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
J.NISHA BANU,J.
msa
C.M.A.(MD)No.72 of 2020
17.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
