Madras High Court
R.Tamilarasi vs Y.Lakshmaiah on 6 July, 2021
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.07.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANAMMAL
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
1.R.Tamilarasi
2.R.Aathishasan (Minor) rep. by his mother and
next friend R.Tamilarasi .. Appellants
Vs.
1.Y.Lakshmaiah
2.The New India Assurance Company Limited,
No.45, Moore Street, Vth Floor, Chennai - 1.
3.Srinivasan
4.Gomathi .. Respondents
(The 1st respondent ex parte in lower Court,
Hence Notice may be dispense with)
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2013 made
in M.C.O.P.No.1853 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
For Appellants : Mr.K.Varadha Kamaraj
For R2 : Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam
For R3 & R4 : Mr.N.Manohar
JUDGMENT
The matter is heard through “Video Conferencing/Hybrid mode”.
2.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 10.01.2013 made in
M.C.O.P.No.1853 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
3.The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.1853 of 2010 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Small Causes Court, Chennai.
The appellants are wife and son of the deceased and the respondents 3 & 4
are parents of the deceased. They filed the above said claim petition, claiming
a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation for the death of S.Raja, who died in
the accident that took place on 06.01.2010.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
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 Jeep belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.9,64,000/- as
compensation to the appellants and respondents 3 & 4.
5.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
claimants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that at
the time of accident the deceased was aged 35 years, was working as Hotel
Cashier in Guru's Banana Leaf Cuisine PTE. Ltd., Singapore and was earning
a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. To prove the same, the 1st appellant who is
the wife of the deceased examined herself as P.W.1 and filed Exs.P4 and P5 to
show that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month as gross
income. The Tribunal failed to consider the evidence of P.W.1, Exs.P4 & P5
and fixed a meagre sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional income of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
deceased. The Tribunal ought to have fixed a sum of Rs.30,000/- as monthly
income of the deceased as claimed by the appellants and awarded
compensation. The Tribunal failed to award any amount towards loss of
estate. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium to 1st
appellant, loss of love and affection and funeral expenses are meagre and
prayed for enhancement of compensation.
7.Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-
Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal considering the evidence of
P.W.1, Exs.P4 to P5, held that there is no evidence to prove the income of the
deceased and fixed a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional income of the
deceased and the same is not meagre. The Tribunal after considering both oral
and documentary evidence in proper perspective has granted just
compensation, which is not meagre. The appellants have not made out any
case for enhancement of compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
8.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
perused the entire materials on record.
9.From the materials available on record it is seen that it is the case of
the appellants that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 35 years,
working as Hotel Cashier in Guru's Banana Leaf Cuisine PTE. Ltd. To prove
the same, the 1st appellant who is the wife of the deceased examined herself
as P.W.1 and filed Exs.P4 & P5 to show that the deceased was earning a sum
of Rs.30,000/- per month as gross income. The Tribunal considering the
evidence of P.W.1, Exs.P4 & P5, held that there is no evidence to prove the
income of the deceased and also not sure whether the said S.Raja would
continue the foreign job and fixed a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional
income of the deceased. The accident is of the year 2010. The cost of living
has increased enormously and salary of even unskilled workers has increased
substantially. Hence, a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month is fixed as notional
income of the deceased. The deceased was aged 35 years at the time of
accident. The Tribunal has not granted any compensation towards future
prospects. The appellants are entitled to 40% compensation towards future
prospects. As per the II Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
rightly adopted multiplier '16'. There are four dependants of the deceased and
the Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses of the
deceased. Thus, by fixing the monthly income as Rs.10,000/- the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pecuniary loss is modified to
Rs.20,16,000/- {Rs.14,000/- [Rs.10,000/- + Rs.4,000/- (40% of Rs.10,000/-)]
X 12 X 16 X 3/4}. The amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of
consortium to the 1st appellant is excessive and hence, the same is hereby
reduced to Rs.40,000/-. The amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of
love and affection is meagre. A reasonable amount of Rs.40,000/- each is
enhanced towards loss of love and affection to the 2nd appellant and
respondents 3 & 4. The Tribunal has not awarded any amounts towards loss
of estate and transportation expenses. A reasonable amount of Rs.15,000/-
each is granted towards loss of estate and transportation expenses. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
S.No Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by this confirmed or
Tribunal Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Pecuniary loss 8,64,000 20,16,000 Enhanced
2. Loss of 50,000 40,000 Reduced
consortium to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
the 1st appellant
3. Loss of love 40,000 1,20,000 Enhanced
and affection to
the 2nd
appellant and
respondents 3
& 4 each
Rs.40,000/-
4. Funeral 10,000 15,000 Enhanced
expenses
5. Loss of estate - 15,000 Granted
6. Transportation - 15,000 Granted
expenses
Total Rs.9,64,000/- Rs.22,21,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.12,57,000/-
10.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.9,64,000/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.22,21,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The 2 nd respondent-
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount now determined
by this Court, along with interest and costs, less the amount already
deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.1853 of 2010 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Small Causes Court, Chennai. On
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
such deposit, the 1st appellant and respondents 3 & 4 are permitted to
withdraw their respective share of the award amount now determined by this
Court, as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along with
proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn by
making necessary applications before the Tribunal. The share of the minor 2nd
appellant is directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks, till
the minor 2nd appellant attains majority. On such deposit, the 1st appellant,
being the mother of the minor 2nd appellant is permitted to withdraw the
accrued interest once in three months for the welfare of the minor 2nd
appellant. No costs.
06.07.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
mtl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
S.KANNAMMAL, J.,
mtl
To
1.The learned V Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Small Causes Court,
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.2114 of 2014
06.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
