Madras High Court
Managing Director vs Minor. S.Gowtham on 18 June, 2021
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.06.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
and
Cros.Obj.No.15 of 2020
In C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
Railway Station New Road,
Kumbakonam – 612 001. ... Respondent/ Appellant
Vs.
1. Minor. S.Gowtham
2. Minor S. Muralidharan
3. A.Muthukrishnan,
(Minor petitioners rep by grandfather,
guardian NF, Muthukrishnan)
All are residing at Post Office Street,
Karamanikuppam and Post,
Cuddalore Taluk.
Permanently residing at 8B1, Old Pillayarkuppam,
Maligampattu, Panruti Taluk. ... Petitioners / Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the Decree and Judgment dated
15.04.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No 1759 of 2017 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Judge, Cuddalore and be pleased
to dismiss the above claim as against the appellant.
For Appellant : Mr.L.Ramanathan
For Respondents-1&2 : Mrs.Ramya V. Rao
for Mr.D.Venkatachalam
In Cross Objection No.15 of 2020
_________
Page No 1 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
1. Minor. S.Gowtham S/o.Late Selvakumar
2. Minor S. Muralidharan S/o.Late Selvakumar
3. A.Muthukrishnan,
Father of Late Selvakumar
Respondents 1 to 3 residing at
Old Post Office Street,
Karamanikuppam and Post,
Cuddalore Taluk.
... Cross Objectors/ Respondents 1 to 3
Vs
Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.,
Railway Station New Road,
Kumbakonam – 612 001. ..Respondent/ Appellant
Cross Objection filed under Order 41, Rule 22 of CPC, to enhance
the award amount in the Cross Objection.
For Cross Objectors : Mrs.Ramya V. Rao
For Respondent : Mr.L.Ramanathan
for Mr. D.venkatachalam
_________
Page No 2 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
JUDGMENT
This appeal in C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019 has been filed by the State
Transport Corporation questioning the award amount.
2. In this appeal, the appellant/State Transport Corporation submits
that a sum of Rs.9,05,000/- would be a just compensation as against
Rs.19,05,000/-.
3. The claimants who are two minors have filed a cross objection in
cross objection No.15/2020 and they seek for enhancement of
compensation.
4. The tribunal while awarding the compensation of Rs.19,05,000/,
has considered a notional income of Rs.10,000/- of the deceased namely
N. Selvakumar.
5. In the claim statement, it has been stated that the deceased was
earning a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month and was earning income from
agricultural activities apart from wholesale and retail business of
cashewnut and other seasonal foods in Panruti.
6. The learned Counsel for the respondents/claimants (minors)
_________
Page No 3 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
submits that in the absence of direct evidence to substantiate monthly
income of Rs.40,000/-, the monthly income of the deceased can be
considered as Rs.20,000/- per month for awarding just compensation.
7. Defending the impugned judgement and decree, the learned
Counsel for the respondents submits that the tribunal has considered
monthly income of Rs.10,000/- which itself is exaggerated and therefore,
submits that the appeal filed by the State Transport Corporation can be
allowed.
8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned
Counsels and perused the exhibits which came to be marked by the
tribunal and the deposition of P.W.1 and P.W.2.
9. It is a pathetic case of two young minor children aged 10 years
and 7 years at the time of accident when their father passed away. The
3rd respondent is the father of the deceased. Already, the wife of the
deceased/the mother of the respondents 1 and 2 had pre-deceased.
10. Considering the year of accident, it would be reasonable to
construed a notional income of Rs.15,000/- for awarding Just
_________
Page No 4 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
compensation as two young children who have been orphaned on account
of the death of their father as they are already lost their mother.
11. In this circumstances, the amount awarded by the tribunal is
enhanced by considering the notional income of the deceased
M.Selvakumar, aged 38 years at the time of accident as Rs.15,000/- per
month.
12. On the aforesaid amount, there shall be an addition of 40%
towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and
Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
13. Considering the age of the deceased as 38 years, the correct
multiplier adopted is 15% as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 12.
st nd st nd
14. Since, the 1 & 2 respondents/1 & 2 claimants are two
rd rd
young children and the 3 respondent/3 claimant is father of the
deceased, they are entitled for compensation towards Parental
Consortium and loss of Filial Consortium respectively as per the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma Insurance Company Limited
_________
Page No 5 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
Vs Nanuram @ Chuhruram and others, (2018) 18 SCC 130.
15. In this circumstances, the amount awarded by the tribunal for a
sum of Rs.19,05,000/- is enhanced to Rs.26,85,000/- as details below:-
Heads and Calculation Amount
Loss of earning capacity:-
Monthly Income
: Rs.15,000/-
Add: *Future Prospects at 40%
(15,000 x 40/100)
: Rs. 6,000/-
----------------
: Rs.21,000/-
rd
Less: Personal Expenses 1/3
(21,000 x 1/3)
: Rs. 7,000/-
Rs.25,20,000/-
----------------
: Rs. 14,000/-
Annual Contribution to the family
(14,000 x 12)
: Rs.1,68,000/-
**Multiplier 15(1,68,000x2/3)
: Rs.25,20,000/-
***Loss of Parental Consortium to Rs. 80,000/-
st nd
the 1 and 2 respondents
(Rs.40,000/- each)
rd
Rs. 20,000/-
Loss of Filial Consortium to the 3
respondent
Loss of Estate Rs. 20,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
_________
Page No 6 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
Transportation Rs. 10,000/-
Total Rs.26,65,000/-
* Future prospects is added by this Court at 40% as per the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
** Proper Multiplier is fixed by this Court as per the decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 12.
*** Parental Consortium and Love and Affection is granted by this
court as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma
Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanuram @ Chuhruram and others,
(2018) 18 SCC 130.
16. The appellant/State Transport Corporation is therefore directed
to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.26,65,000/-
together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of numbering of
the claim petition till the date of such deposit, less any amount already
deposited by it, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this Judgment.
st nd st nd
17. Since the 1 and 2 respondents/1 and 2 claimants are stated
_________
Page No 7 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
to be minors at the time of filing of the claim petition, their shares shall
be deposited in an interest bearing account and the interest shall be
rd rd
allowed to be withdrawn by their grand father 3 respondent/3 claimant
st
for the benefit of the minors. On attaining the age of majority, the 1 and
nd st nd
2 respondents/1 and 2 claimants may also file appropriate application
for withdrawing their shares of compensation.
18. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the
appellant/State Transport Corporation is dismissed and the cross objection
filed by the respondents/claimants is partially allowed. No costs.
18.06.2021
ksa-2
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
_________
Page No 8 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
To:
1.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Judge, Cuddalore.
2.The V.R.Section,
Madras High Court, Madras.
_________
Page No 9 of 10
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019
C.SARAVANAN, J.
ksa-2
C.M.A.No.3956 of 2019 and
Cros.Obj.No.15 of 2020
18.06.2021
_________
Page No 10 of 10
