Madras High Court
Muniammal vs Vengammal on 9 March, 2021
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
1.Muniammal
2.Minor. Prasanth .. Appellants
(Minor 2nd appellant represented by his
mother, Muniammal, 1st appellant herein)
Vs.
1.Vengammal
2.The Branch Manger,
National Insurance Company Limited,
Post Box No.23, No.88-F, Bye Pass Road,
Dharmapuri. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated
16.04.2008 made in M.C.O.P.No.893 of 2006 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Krishnagiri.
For Appellants : Mr.K.Prasanna
for Mr.M.Sriram
For R2 : Mr.D.Bhaskaran
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the award dated 16.04.2008 made in
M.C.O.P.No.893 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Court, Krishnagiri.
2.The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.893 of 2006 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court,
Krishnagiri. They filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Paneerselvam, who died
in the accident that took place on 20.04.2005.
3.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 1st respondent and directed the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- as
compensation to the appellants.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that at
the time of accident the deceased was aged 16 years, 11th Standard student
and also helping his father in the Mango and Seasonal business and was
earning a sum of Rs.3,300/- per month. The Tribunal erroneously awarded
lumpsum amount of Rs.1,80,000/- as compensation. The Tribunal ought to
have fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,300/- as claimed by the
appellants and awarded compensation. The Tribunal failed to award any
amount towards loss of love and affection, transportation charges, funeral
expenses and loss of estate. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is meagre and prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6.Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-
Insurance Company contended that the deceased was a minor boy aged 16
years at the time of accident. The appellants did not file any document to
prove that he was earning a sum of Rs.3,300/- per month by helping his father
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
in the Mango and Seasonal business. Therefore, the lumpsum amount of
Rs.1,80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation to the appellants is
not meagre. The appellants have not made out any case for enhancement and
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials on record.
8.It is the case of the appellants that at the time of accident the
deceased was aged 16 years, 11th Standard student and also helping his father
in the Mango and Seasonal business and was earning a sum of Rs.3,300/- per
month. But they did not file any material document to prove the avocation and
income of the deceased. In the absence of any material evidence with regard to
avocation and income, the Tribunal has awarded a lumpsum amount of
Rs.1,80,000/- as compensation to the appellants. The accident occurred in the
year 2005 and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre. Hence, a
sum of Rs.3,300/- per month as claimed by the appellants is fixed as notional
income of the deceased. The deceased was aged 16 years at the time of
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
accident and the multiplier applicable as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court reported in 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 SC Supreme Court, [Sarla Verma &
others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another], is '18'. The deceased
was a bachelor at the time of accident and hence 50% has to be deducted
towards personal expenses of the deceased. Thus, the compensation towards
loss of dependency is arrived at Rs.3,56,400/- [Rs.3,300/- X 12 X 18 X ½].
The appellants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of love and affection
and Rs.10,000/- each towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. Thus, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:
S. Description Amount awarded Amount awarded Award confirmed
No by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of dependency 1,80,000/- 3,56,400/- Enhanced
2. Funeral expenses - 10,000/- Granted
3. Loss of love and - 40,000/- Granted
affection
4. Loss of estate - 10,000/- Granted
Total Rs.1,80,000/- Rs.4,16,400/- Enhanced by
Rs.2,36,400/-
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.1,80,000/- is hereby
enhanced to Rs.4,16,400/- 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.893 of 2006 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Krishnagiri. On
such deposit, the 1st appellant is permitted to withdraw her 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. It is made
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
clear that the appellants are not entitled to any interest on the amount of
Rs.2,36,400/-, now enhanced by this Court for the default period as per the
order of this Court dated 20.02.2020 made in M.P.No.1 of 2011 in
C.M.A.No.SR.58069 of 2011. The appellants are directed to pay the
necessary Court fee for the enhanced amount of compensation. No costs.
09.03.2021
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The Principal District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Krishnagiri.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.866 of 2020
09.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
