Madras High Court
M.Muthulakshmi vs M.Anto Tyson on 15 November, 2021
1
N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 15.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1444 of 2018
1.M.Muthulakshmi
2.M.Sangavi
3.M.Ranjithkumar
4.U.Kalimuthu Konar
5.R.Kalaiselvi .. Appellants/claimants
Vs
1.M.Anto Tyson
2.Reliance GI. Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Reliance House, Haddows Road
Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 034 .. Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the judgment and
decree dated 04.01.2018 made in MACT O.P.No.695/2014 on the file of
II Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Court of Small Causes)
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
For Appellants .. Mrs.P.T.Saleem Fathima
For Respondents .. Mr.S.Arunkumar for R2
R-1 exparte
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment
and decree dated 04.01.2018 made in MACT O.P.No.695/2014 on the
file of II Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Court of Small
Causes) Chennai.
2. The claimants are the appellants herein. The first appellant is the
wife of the deceased. The appellants 2, 3 and 5 are the daughters and son
respectively of the deceased and the first appellant and the 4th appellant is
the father of the deceased.
3. The case of the claimants before the trial Court is as follows:
In an accident that had occurred on 11.01.2014, at about 20.00 hrs.,
when the deceased was standing on the northern side of Ambattur
Industrial Estate road, a motor cycle bearing registration No.TN 07
BL8861 proceeding from west to east direction in a rash and negligent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
manner and dashed against the deceased. As a result of which, the
deceased fell down and sustained head injuries and subsequently was
taken to hospital and died in the hospital. The accident occurred due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the motor cycle. The
claimants filed the claim petition and claimed compensation of
Rs.51,00,000/-.
4.Before the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent denied the manner in
which the accident occurred and denied the allegations made in the claim
petition. Since the driving license of the driver of the vehicle and the
insurance coverage were denied by the 2nd respondent, it is the case of the
2nd respondent that the respondent is not liable to pay any compensation
and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5.Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, the claimant/1st
petitioner/wife of the deceased examined herself as P.W.1 and marked
Ex.P1 to Ex.P15. In support of her contention, P.W.2 was examined as
eye witness to speak about the accident and no documents were marked
on her side. On the side of the 2nd respondent, no oral and documentary
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
evidence were adduced.
6.The Tribunal, on considering the pleadings, oral and
documentary evidence held that, the accident occurred due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the motor cycle and awarded a sum
of Rs.9,33,000/- as compensation to the Claimants. Not being satisfied
with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have come
up with the present Appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
documents available on record.
8.It is the case of Appellants/Claimants that, the Tribunal erred in
fixing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-, when he was
actually earning a sum of Rs.17,500/- to Rs.20,000/- per month in the Tea
bunk shop owned by him and that, the Tribunal ought to have awarded
compensation of a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head of loss of
consortium to the first claimant/wife. However, the Tribunal erred in
granting a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. The Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
erred in not awarding any compensation towards loss of love and
affection to the other claimants, who are children and father of the
deceased. The Tribunal ought to have considered the compensation
under the head for loss of estate Rs.2,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded
only a sum of Rs.15,000/-, instead of Rs.59,000/- for funeral expenses.
9. It is seen that, the Tribunal has fixed only a sum of
Rs.6,000/- as the monthly income of the deceased, who was owning a tea
bunk shop. Though the claimants have averred that, the deceased was
earning a sum of Rs.17,500/- to Rs.20,000/-, no documentary evidence
was produced to substantiate the same. Considering the fact that cost of
living has increased enormously, this Court fixes a sum of Rs.10,000/- as
the monthly income of the deceased. In view of the same, the
compensation towards loss of dependency is arrived at a sum of
Rs.14,62,500/- (Rs.10000 + 2500 - 1/4 = 9375x12 x 13).
10. As the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- as
compensation for loss of consortium, this Court feels it appropriate to fix
the same as Rs.40,000/- under the head 'loss of consortium'. As regards
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
grant of compensation under the head 'loss of love and affection to the 2nd
and 3rd Appellants' and 'loss of love and affection to the 4th Appellant, this
Court feels it appropriate to fix a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- towards 'loss of
love and affection to appellants 2 to 4.
11. As far as compensation of a sum of Rs.15,000/- awarded
under the head 'Funeral expenses', this Court finds it just and reasonable.
As no amount has been awarded under the head 'loss of Estate', this Court
feels it appropriate to award a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the same.
12. In fine, the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced to a sum of Rs.16,52,500/-. Details of the same are
tabulated below:
S.N Description Amount awarded Amount modified Award confirmed
o by Tribunal by this Court or enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs.) granted
1. Loss of Dependency 8,77,500 14,62,500.00 Enhanced
7500-1875=5625 (10000+2500-
5625 * 12 * 13 1/4=9375*12*13)
2. Funeral expenses 15,000.00 15,000.00 Unaltered
3. Loss of love and Not granted 1,20,000.00 Enhanced
affection
4. Loss of Consortium to 40,000.00 40,000/- unaltered
the first appellant
5 Loss of estate ---------- 15,000.00 Awarded
Total Rs.9,33,000.00 Rs.16,52,500.00 Enhanced by
Rs.7,19,500/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. In the result, the compensation of a sum of Rs.9,33,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal is hereby enhanced to a sum of Rs.16,52,500/-
(Rupees sixteen lakhs Lakhs fifty two Thousand five Hundred only),
together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of
filing the Claim Petition till the date of deposit. The 2nd respondent 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 eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.695 of 2014 on the file of the II
Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes,
Chennai. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer
the Award amount directly to the Bank account of the
Appellant/Claimant through RTGS, within a period of two weeks.
11. Appellants/Claimants shall pay necessary Court fee, if any,
on the enhanced compensation. However, it is made clear that, if there is
any delay in filing the above Appeal and in case, any order is passed by
this Court earlier depriving interest for the period of delay in question,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
interest for the period of delay shall be excluded.
12. In fine, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
No costs.
15.11.2021
RR
To
1. The II Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Court of Small
Causes) Chennai.
2. V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.KANNAMMAL, J.
RR
C.M.A.No.1444 / 2018
15.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
