Madras High Court
Royal Sundaram Alliance ... vs P.Govindammal on 6 July, 2021
CMA No.805 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.07.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
CMA No.805 of 2016
and
CMP No.6456 of 2016 and CMP No.12346 of 2017
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.
No.45 & 46, Whites Road,
Royapettah,
Chennai - 600 014. ... Appellant
Versus
1. P.Govindammal
2. Santhakumar
3. Minor Kaviyarasi
(Minor respondent represented by her
next friend and mother 1st respondent)
4. S. Rangan
5. Kasthuri ... Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, against the decree and judgment dated 30th day of June,
2015 made in M.C.O.P. No.940 of 2013 on the file of Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims
Cases), Krishnagiri.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Vinod
For Respondents : M/s.Mukund R. Pandiyan
for R1 & R2
R3 - Minor rep. by R1
R4 - Served - No appearance
R5 - Died
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/11
CMA No.805 of 2016
JUDGMENT
(Heard Video Conference)
This appeal has been filed by the Insurance company challenging
the award dated 30.06.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Special District Court), Krishnagiri in MCOP No.940 of 2013.
2. The appellant / Insurance Company has challenged the
impugned award only on the ground that the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal to the contributory negligence fixed on the part
3. The Tribunal under the impugned award directed the appellant /
Insurance Company to pay a compensation of Rs.14,69,000/- together
with interest and costs as detailed hereunder :-
Heads Amount awarded
by the Tribunal
(Rs.)
Future loss of income 1134000
Loss of consortium for the 50000
petitioner had lost her
husband at the age of 39 years
for the rest of her life
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
Heads Amount awarded
by the Tribunal
(Rs.)
Loss of love and affection to 200000
the second petitioner and
minor petitioner 3 who had
lost their father in their future
life (Rs.1,00,000 x 2)
Loss of love and affection for 30000
the respondents – 3 who had
lost her son, financial
supporter in the evening of
her life
Transport to Hospital 10000
Funeral Expenses 20000
Loss of estate 25000
Total 1469000
4. Heard Mr.K.Vinod, learned counsel for the appellant /
Insurance Company and M/s.Mukund R. Pandiyan, learned counsel for
the 1st and 2nd respondents. Despite service of notice on the 4th
respondent, there is no representation on his side. Pending Appeal, the
5th respondent is dead.
5. This Court has perused and examined the impugned award
before the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
6. The deceased Nandan @ Nandakumar, died on 03.03.2010 as a
result of an accident caused by a vehicle insured with the appellant /
Insurance Company. The claimants are his wife and two children and his
mother was arrayed as 3rd respondent in the claim petition. In the claim
petition, the claimants have pleaded that the deceased was aged 40 years
and was a Driver cum Cleaner, earning Rs.15,000/- per month along
with batta.
7. The Tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income of the
deceased at Rs.9,000/-p.m. and the age and avocation of the deceased has
not been disputed by the appellant / Insurance Company before the
Tribunal. The accident happened on 03.03.2010. No supporting
document has been filed by the claimants before the Tribunal to prove
that the deceased was earning Rs.9,000/-p.m. at the time of the accident.
This Court is of the considered view that when no supporting documents
were filed by the claimants to prove that the deceased was earning
Rs.9,000/-p.m. as a Driver in the year 2010, the Tribunal ought not to
have fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- as it is on
the higher side.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
8. However, the Tribunal has erroneously failed to award any
compensation towards loss of future prospects, which the claimants are
legally entitled to as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in 2017
16 SCC 680. If the loss of future prospects was granted by the Tribunal
at 25% to the claimants in accordance with the settled law, the fixation of
the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- though it is
on the higher side will become immaterial. If the loss of future prospects
is added, the overall compensation towards loss of dependency cannot be
considered to be excessive as alleged by the appellant / Insurance
Company. Accordingly, the loss of dependency assessed by the
Tribunal at Rs. 11,34,000/- to the claimants is confirmed by this Court.
9. With regard to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
towards loss of consortium at Rs.50,000/- is concerned, the same is on
the higher side and not in accordance with Pranay Sethi's case referred
to supra. As per the said decision, the first claimant, who is the wife of
the deceased is only entitled to rs.40,000/- and not Rs.50,000/- fixed by
the Tribunal. Accordingly, the loss of consortium is reduced to
Rs.40,000/- from Rs.50,000/- fixed by the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
10. Similarly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the
second and third claimants, who are the children of the deceased at
Rs.2,00,000/- is on the higher side and not in accordance with the settled
law. If the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay
Sethi's case, referred to supra is applied, each of the children will be
entitled only to Rs.40,000/- and the deceased having two children both
put together will be entitled to Rs.80,000/- and not Rs.2,00,000/- fixed by
the Tribunal. Accordingly, the same is modified by this Court to
Rs.80,000/-, i.e., Rs.40,000/- each for two children.
11. Similarly, the mother of the deceased, who was the 3 rd
respondent in the claim petition is entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of
love and affection in accordance with the settled law, but the Tribunal
has erroneously fixed the same at Rs.30,000/-. Accordingly, the
compensation towards loss of love and affection to the mother of the
deceased is enhanced to Rs.40,000/- by this Court instead of Rs.30,000/-
fixed by the Tribunal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
12. As regards the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards
transportation charges at Rs.10,000/- is concerned, the same will not
arise as it is a fatal accident claim. Hence, the same is set aside by this
Court.
13. The Tribunal has also erroneously awarded a higher
compensation towards funeral expenses and loss of estate, which is not in
accordance with Pranay Sethi's case, referred to supra. If the said
decision was applied, the correct compensation payable towards funeral
expenses and loss of estate are Rs.15,000/- each. Accordingly, the same
is modified by this Court.
14. For the foregoing reasons, the award of the Tribunal is hereby
modified in the following manner :
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
Heads Amount awarded Amount reduced
by the Tribunal by this Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Future loss of income 1134000 1134000
Loss of consortium for the 50000 40000
petitioner had lost her
husband at the age of 39
years for the rest of her life
Loss of love and affection to 200000 80000
the second petitioner and
minor petitioner 3 who had
lost their father in their
future life (Rs.1,00,000 x 2)
Loss of love and affection 30000 40000
for the 5th respondent herein
/ 3rd respondent in claim
petiiton who had lost her
son, financial supporter in
the evening of her life
Transport to Hospital 10000 -
Funeral Expenses 20000 15000
Loss of estate 25000 15000
Total 1469000 1324000
15. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant / Insurance
Company, stands partly allowed by reducing the compensation from
Rs.14,69,000/- to Rs.13,24,000/- as indicated above. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
16a. The appellant / Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the reduced award amount, as assessed by this Court together with
interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of
realization, less the amount, if any, already deposited to the credit of
M.C.O.P. No.940 of 2013 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases), Krishnagiri,
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
Judgment. It is made clear that the appellant / Insurance Company is
permitted to withdraw excess amount, if any paid by them.
16b.On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to
transfer the award amount directly to the bank account of the respondents
1, and 2 /major claimants, as per the same ratio of apportionment made
by the Tribunal, through RTGS, within a period of two weeks thereafter.
Insofar as the share of the 5th respondent, who is the mother of the
deceased, who died pending Appeal it shall be apportioned between the
1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents in equal proportions.
16c. Insofar as the share of the third respondent / minor claimant
is concerned, the same shall be deposited in Fixed deposit in any one of
the Nationalized Banks, till she attains the age of majority and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
interest accrued thereon shall be withdrawn by the guardian of the minor
claimant once in three months, directly from the Bank. If the third
respondent / minor claimant has attained the age of majority, it is open to
her to file formal petition before the Tribunal to get her share of
apportionment.
06.07.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
vsi2
To
1. The Special District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Cases,
Krishnagiri.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section
High Court of Madras, Chennai - 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CMA No.805 of 2016
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
vsi2
CMA No.805 of 2016
06.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
