Divisional Manager vs Ramiah Thevar ... 1St
2021 Latest Caselaw 4131 Mad

                                                                       C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   Dated: 18.02.2021

                                                       CORAM

                               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.KRISHNAVALLI

                                             C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013
                                                       and
                                               M.P(MD) No.1 of 2013


                     Divisional Manager,
                     National Insurance Company Limited,
                     Divisional Office,
                     No.40, Pereira Street,
                     Tuticorin.                          .... Appellant/2nd Respondent

                                                      -Vs-

                     1.Ramiah Thevar                          ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner


                     2.M/s.Southern Petrochemical
                       Industries Corporation Limited,
                       Spic Nagar, Tuticorin-628 005.        ... 2nd Respondent/1st Respondent

                     Prayer: This Petition is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles
                     Act, to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order made in M.C.O.P.No.
                     597 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (II
                     Additional District Judge) Tirunelveli, dated 15.09.2006.

                                   For Appellant      : M/s.Uma Ramanathan

                                   For R-1            : No appearance

                                   For R-2            : Mr.P.Chandra Bose


                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                               C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

                                                              JUDGMENT

Challenge made in this appeal is to the award passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Additional District Judge)

Tirunelveli, in M.C.O.P.No.597 of 2005, dated 15.09.2006.

2.The brief facts of the case are that on 11.09.2004, at about

11.30 hrs, the deceased was sitting in the Trailer bearing Registration

No.TNT-1822 belonging to the first respondent. When the Trailer was

coming near the main gate of SPIC Limited, the driver had driven the

Tractor in a rash and negligent manner and as a result of which, the

deceased fell down and sustained head injuries and died on the spot.

A criminal case in Crime No. 729 of 2004 for the offences punishable

under Section 304(A) of IPC was registered against the driver of the

offending vehicle by Muthiahpuram Police Station. In the mean while,

the claimant, being the husband, sought compensation of

Rs.3,00,000/- on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle

was responsible for the accident before the trial Court.

3.The claimant has stated that the deceased was working as

Gardener and she was earning Rs.2,500/- per month.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

4.The claim was opposed by the appellant disputing the

manner of accident.

5.The Tribunal, upon consideration of oral and documentary

evidence, came to the conclusion that the driver of the offending

vehicle was responsible for the accident and awarded compensation of

Rs.1,00,000/- with interest @ 7.5 % p.a.

6.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on

record.

7.The manner of the accident and the finding on negligence

are not in dispute and the appeal is confined only to quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

8.It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant

that the tribunal has not applied the correct multiplier and the

quantum of award is on the higher side, so the quantum is to be

reduced. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the first

respondent/claimant submitted that the award is reasonable, which

does not warrant any interference of this court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

.

9.In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the deceased

was working as Gardener and she was 45 years old at the time of

accident. The Tribunal gave a finding that notional income of

Rs.15,000/- has been fixed as annual income. After deducting 1/3

amount of her expenses, Rs.10,000/- was finalized. But as per Ex.P5,

the first respondent alone is the legal heir of the deceased. At the

time of accident, the first respondent aged about 60 years and that

was also taken into account and the appropriate multiplier is '8'. By

applying the proper multiplier '8', the Tribunal awarded Rs.80,000/-

towards loss of dependency. Further, the Tribunal awarded

Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium; Rs.3,000/- for funeral

expenses; Rs.7,000 towards shock and mental agony. In total, the

Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- together with interest @ 7.5%

p.a. payable to the first respondent by the appellant.

10.This Court is of the considered opinion that the award of

the tribunal, based on the evidence, is reasonable and warrants no

interference of this court and the same is confirmed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

11.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed,

confirming the award of the tribunal. No costs. Consequently,

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

18.02.2021 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No sji

To

1.The II Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tirunelveli.

2.The Section Officer, The Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.303 of 2013

T.KRISHNAVALLI,J

sji

CMA(MD) No.303 of 2013

18.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/