Madras High Court
Lalitha vs Abdul Azeez on 8 January, 2021
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON: 02.12.2021
DELIVERED ON: 14.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
1.Lalitha
2.Vanaja
3.Thanikgachalam
4.Janakiraman ...appellants
Vs.
1.Abdul Azeez
2.The Manager
United India Insurance Company Limited
Motor Third Party Claims Office. ...respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicle Act, 209588 against the Judgment and Decree passed in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.114 of 2019 dated 08.01.2021 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, No.1, Special District Court, Thiruvallur.
For Appellants : Mr.M.L.Ramesh
For Respondents : Mr.D.Bhaskaran for R2
No appearance for R1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.SIVAGNANAM, J]
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed as against the
Judgment and Decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.114 of 2019 dated 08.01.2021
on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, No.1, Special District
Court, Thiruvallur.
2.For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as per their
ranking in the claim petition.
3.It is the case of the claimants that on 10.02.2018, at 19.00 hours
when the deceased was proceeding from Uthukottai to Senjiyagaram Village
in the two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN 20 AF 9639, a two wheeler
bearing Registration No.TN 02 BF 5619 proceeding in the same direction, hit
against the vehicle belongs to the deceased. Due to the accident, the deceased
sustained grievous injuries all over the body and and died in the hospital.
4.The 1st claimant is the wife of the deceased; 2nd claimant is the
daughter; 3rd and 4th claimants are sons of the deceased. Alleging that the
accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of
the two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN 02 BF 5619, the claimants laid a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
petition, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/-.
5.Resisting the claim petition, the Insurance Company filed their
counter disputing the manner of accident, age, avocation and income of the
deceased and its liability to pay the compensation.
6.To substantiate the case, on the side of the claimants PWs1 and 2
were examined and Exs.P1 to P14 were marked. On the side of the Insurance
Company, Rws1 to 3 were examined and Exs.R1 to 3 were marked.
7.The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence
held that the accident had occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the
two wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 02 BF 5619 and awarded a
compensation of Rs.13,40,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 7.5%
p.a., from the date of presentation of the petition till the date of realization.
Further, the Tribunal directed the respondents 1 and 2 to pay the award
amount jointly and severally. Assailing the award, the claimants are before
this Court with this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
8.The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, Mr.M.L.Ramesh,
would submit that the accident had happened due to the negligence on the
part of the rider of the 1st respondent vehicle bearing Registration No. TN 02
BF 5619. Further, the Tribunal erred in fixing the monthly income of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
deceased on assumption as Rs.20,000/- and failed to consider the Income Tax
Return filed by the claimants, at the time of trial, which is marked as Ex.P.10
to P12. The Tribunal failed to award a proper and reasonable amount under
the head of 'Loss of love and affection' to the daughter and sons of the
deceased and also failed to award any amount under the head of 'medical
expenses'. Thus, the claimants pleaded to enhance the award amount.
9.The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company supported
the award passed by the Tribunal and further contended that the age of the
deceased was 63 years at the time of the accident and hence, he is not
entitled for future prospectus. He would further submit that though the
deceased is a LIC agent by profession his monthly commission from LIC may
vary, as per the number of policies he is getting from the customer. As per the
decision laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi, the Tribunal has rightly fixed
the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- and rightly arrived the
amounts awarded under other heads. Hence, he pleaded to dismiss the
appeal.
10.Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the
materials available on record.
11.A perusal of records would show that the deceased was aged about
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.4/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
63 years at the time of accident. He is a LIC agent by profession and as per
the claimants, monthly income of the deceased is Rs.1,00,000/-, in order to
prove the same, the claimants produced the Exs.P.11 series Form 16(A). It
reflects the following facts:-
“It was filed in the year of 1991-2010. From 2005 – 2006 the income
of the deceased mentioned as Rs.82,400/- and 2007 – 2008 the income of the
deceased mentioned as Rs.1,09,230/- and in the year of 2008 – 2009 the
income of the deceased mentioned as Rs.1,69,110/- and in the year of 2010 –
2011 the income of the deceased mentioned as Rs.2,36,860/-.”
12.Further, it is an admitted fact that after the death of the deceased,
the claimants are continued to receive the commission amount from LIC. The
Tribunal rightly observed that the deceased received commission of
Rs.50,000/-, Rs.30,000/- and Rs.20,000/- as monthly income on various
months. Though the deceased received some amount as monthly income from
LIC in the form commission, it is not a regular one and it may vary from time
to time, as per the number of policies. Once the policy ends, the agent wont
get the commission from LIC. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal has
rightly fixed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/-.
13.The learned counsel for the claimants relied upon the decision of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malarvizhi and Ors. Vs. United
India Insurance Company Limited & Anr, wherein, on the basis of the
income tax return for the year 1997 – 1998, income of the deceased was
fixed and not for the periods 1999 – 2000 and 2000 – 2001, which reflected a
reduction in the annual income of the deceased. It was accepted by the Apex
Court. But in the case on hand, admittedly, the deceased was a LIC agent.
Apart from the commission from LIC, no income was reflected in his income
tax returns. Therefore, the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the
appellant is not helpful.
14.We have considered the award amount granted under other heads
and we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the award passed by the
Tribunal. Further, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the award of the
Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.114 of 2019 dated 08.01.2021 on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, No.1, Special District Court, Thiruvallur,
and hence, the same is confirmed.
15.Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as devoid
of merits. Award passed by the Tribunal The Insurance Company/2nd
respondent is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued
interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.6/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Thereafter,
the 2nd respondent shall recover the same from the 1st respondent, as Pay and
Recovery. On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the
award amount less the amount already withdrawn, if any, together with
proportionate interest and costs. The apportionment fixed by the Tribunal is
hereby confirmed. No costs.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
14.12.2021
Jer
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, No.1
Special District Court, Thiruvallur.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/8
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
Jer
C.M.A. No.2095 of 2021
14.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.8/8
