The Managing Director vs Soniya
2021 Latest Caselaw 4309 Mad

                                                                           C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 19.02.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                               THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

                                               C.M.A.No.440 of 2021


                    The Managing Director
                    Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.
                    No.12, Ramakrishna Road, Salem-7.                      ... Appellant


                                                        Vs.
                    1.Soniya

                    2.Minor Udayakumar
                    3.Minor Rithiga
                    (Minors represented by their
                    next friend and mother 1st respondent)

                    4.Deivanai
                    5.Mani                                                 ... Respondents



                    Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
                    Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.01.2014
                    made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accident Claims
                    Tribunal, Sub Court, Rasipuram.



                    1/7


http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                   C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

                                          For Appellant     : Mr.D.Venkatachalam


                                                     JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the

appellant/Transport Corporation to set aside the award dated 29.01.2014

made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Sub Court, Rasipuram.

2.The appellant/Transport Corporation is the respondent in

M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub

Court, Rasipuram. The respondents filed the said claim petition claiming a

sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Prabu, who died

in the accident that took place on 24.05.2012.

3.According to the respondents, on the date of accident i.e., on

24.05.2012 at 7.45 p.m., while the deceased Prabu was riding TVS victor

motorcycle on Salem – Namakkal National Highways on the bridge near

Sambandham mill, the driver of the bus belonging to the

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

appellant/Transport Corporation, who came behind the said Prabu, drove the

same in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle driven

by the said Prabu and caused the accident. In the accident, the said Prabu

sustained fatal injuries and died on the same day in the hospital. Hence, the

respondents have filed the above claim petition claiming compensation against

the appellant/Transport Corporation.

4.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary

evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by

the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation and

directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.11,32,750/- as compensation to the

respondents.

5.Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in

the said award dated 29.01.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.264 of 2012, the

appellant/Transport Corporation has come out with the present appeal.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation contended that the respondents have failed to produce valid

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

documents to prove the age, avocation and income of the deceased. According

to the respondents, the deceased was working as a coolie in a bricklin and was

earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month at the time of accident. In the absence

of any material evidence, the Tribunal erroneously fixed monthly income of

the deceased at Rs.4,500/- per month and granted 50% enhancement towards

future prospects, which is excessive and prayed for setting aside the award of

the Tribunal.

7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport

Corporation and perused the entire materials on record.

8.It is the case of the respondents that the deceased was working as a

coolie in bricklin and was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month at the time

of accident. They failed to substantiate the said contention. In the absence of

any material evidence with regard to avocation and income of the deceased,

the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month as notional income of the

deceased. The accident is of the year 2012 and the monthly income fixed by

the Tribunal is meagre. The respondents stated that the deceased Prabu was

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

aged 25 years at the time of accident. But they did not file any valid document

to prove the same. The Tribunal fixed the age of the deceased as 25 years as

per Exs.P2 and P4, Post-mortem certificate and death certificate respectively,

which is proper. The Tribunal granted 50% enhancement towards future

prospects, which is excessive. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court

reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 609 (SC) [National Insurance Co. Ltd. v.

Pranay Sethi and others], the respondents are entitled to only 40%

enhancement towards future prospects. Since the Tribunal has fixed a meagre

sum as notional income of the deceased, 50% enhancement granted by the

Tribunal towards future prospects is not interfered with. Though the Tribunal

awarded an excessive sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium, since

the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of estate and a

sum of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses is

meagre, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of

consortium is not interfered with. Therefore, the total compensation awarded

by the Tribunal is not excessive warranting interference by this Court.

9. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

sum of Rs.11,32,750/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the

respondents along with interest and costs is confirmed. The

appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award

amount along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if

any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. On such deposit, the respondents 1, 4 and 5 are permitted to

withdraw their respective share of the award amount, as per the

apportionment fixed by the Tribunal along with proportionate interest and

costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. The shares of the minor

respondents 2 and 3 are directed to be deposited in any one of the

Nationalized Banks, till the minors attain majority. The 1 st respondent being

mother of the minor respondents 2 and 3 is permitted to withdraw the accrued

interest, once in three months for the welfare of the minor respondents 2 and

3. No costs.

19.02.2021

Index : Yes / No kj

V.M.VELUMANI,J.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

Kj

To

1.The Subordinate Judge Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Rasipuram.

2.The Section Officer VR Section High Court Madras.

C.M.A.No.440 of 2021

19.02.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in