Madras High Court
Royal Sundaram Alliance ... vs P.Mamtadevi P. Mehta on 30 November, 2021
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
and CMP.No.4007 of 2019
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Sundaram Towers,
No.45 & 46, Whites Road,
Chennai 600 014. ...appellant
Vs.
1. P.Mamtadevi P. Mehta
2. Minor P.Tanya P. Mehta
3. Minor P.Khushi P.Mehta
[R2 and R3, are minors rep. by next friend
and guardian mother P.Mamtadevi P.Mehta]
4. Gavridevi Champalal Mehta
5. Elango @ N.Elangovan
6. R.Murugan ...respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2018
passed in MCOP.No.38 of 2015 on the file of the Special District Court,
(Full Additional Charge) for Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Erode.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Vasudevan
For Respondents : Notice served. No Appearance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.SIVAGNANAM, J]
The appeal is heard through video conferencing.
2. This appeal arises out of the award passed by the Special District
Court, (Full Additional Charge) for Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at
Erode in MCOP.No.38 of 2015, dated 08.01.2018.
3. It is the case of the respondents 1 to 4/claimants that on 29.06.2011
at about 6.00 am, the deceased Pawan Champalal Mehta while walking on
the left side of the Erode to Perundurai Road, a Lorry bearing Registration
No.TN-52-Y-5245 belonging to the sixth respondent, driven by its
driver/the fifth respondent herein in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
behind him. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained severe injuries and
was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Erode, but he
succumbed to the injuries on the same day.
4. It is the further case of the claimants that the deceased was the
proprietor of M/s.Ram Creation, which is involved in cloth business, and
was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- and also as a Manager in Sudarshan Dye
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.2/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
Chem at Shahibaug, Ahemdabad, he was getting a salary of Rs.15,000/-.
Thus, the deceased was earning a total sum of Rs.40,000/- per month.
Hence, they laid a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as
compensation.
5.The appellant/Insurance Company resisted the claim petition by
filing counter statement, in which, it is stated that, only the deceased was
responsible for the accident and hence, the appellant is not liable to pay the
compensation. They have also disputed the age, income and occupation of
the deceased.
6. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimants, the first claimant
gave evidence as PW1 and examined 2 other witnesses as PWs.2 and 3 and
Exs.P1 to P10 were marked. On the side of the respondents, no oral and
documentary evidence was adduced.
7. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of the evidence produced by the
claimants, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred due to the
rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Lorry bearing Registration
No.TN-52-Y-5245. By coming to such conclusion, the Tribunal awarded a
compensation of Rs.22,27,416/- along with interest at 7.5% per annum and
directed the appellant/Insurance Company to pay the above compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.3/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
Questioning the award, the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance
Company.
8. Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel appearing of the
appellant/Insurance Company would submit that the monthly income taken
by the Tribunal for the deceased was on the higher side. Further, the
Tribunal has not followed the legal precedents of the Hon'ble Apex Court
while arriving at the quantum.
9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance
Company and perused the materials available on record.
10. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the deceased Pawan
Champalal Mehta met with an accident and died on 29.06.2011 and his
legal heirs, viz., his wife, 2 children and mother, are the claimants. In the
claim petition, it is stated that the deceased died at the age of 41 years and
earning Rs.40,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal based on Ex.P10
Income Tax Assessment, had fixed the monthly income of the deceased at
Rs.13,000/- and added 25% towards future prospects and arrived the
income of the deceased at Rs.16,250/- [13,000 + 3,250]. Then, 1/4 of the
amount was deducted towards personal expenses and thus, the Loss of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.4/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
Dependency was determined at Rs.12,187/- [16,250 - 4,063]. Then,
considering the age of the deceased, multiplier "14" was applied and the
Loss of Earning Power was determined by the Tribunal at Rs.20,47,416/-
[12,187 x 14 x 12].
11. In addition to that, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-
towards Transport Expenses; Rs.15,000/- towards Funeral Expenses;
Rs.5,000/- towards Damages to Clothing and articles; Rs.15,000/- towards
Loss of Estate; Rs.40,000/- towards Loss of Consortium; and Rs.1,00,000/-
towards Mental Agony and Loss of Love and Affection. In total, the
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.22,27,416/- along with interest at 7.5%
from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit. In our considered
view, the award of the Tribunal is fair and reasonable, which does not
warrant interference by this Court. In fine, the impugned award is
confirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
12. In such view of the matter, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
dismissed as devoid of merits. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed
to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest and costs, less the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.5/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimants are
permitted to withdraw their shares as apportioned by the Tribunal, less the
amount already withdrawn, if any, together with proportionate interest and
costs. Though the claimants 2 and 3 were minors at the time of filing the
claim petition, but they would have now attained majority, hence, they are
also permitted to withdraw their respective shares. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S, J] [V.S.G., J]
30.11.2021
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order: Yes/No
pvs
To
1. Special District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Erode
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.6/7
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
pvs
C.M.A. No.1424 of 2019
30.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.7/7
