Madras High Court
Vasantha vs D.R.Balasubramaniyan on 5 April, 2022
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
1.Vasantha
2.M.Ramalingam ... Appellants
Vs.
1.D.R.Balasubramaniyan
2. The Divisional Manager,
National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Divisional Office, No.110, JN Street,
Puducherry - 605 001. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree in M.C.O.P.No.4381
of 2018 dated 29.11.2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore.
For Appellants : Ms.Ramya V. Rao
For Respondents : Mr.P.Sankaranarayanan
for R2
R1- Not ready in notice
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Seeking enhancement of the Award passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore in
M.C.O.P.No.4381 of 2018 dated 29.11.2021, the Appellants/ claimants are
before this Court.
2. The Appellants / claimants are the parents of the deceased
Krishnamoorthy, who had died in a road accident on 27.06.2018, when he
was travelling on a motor-cycle bearing Registration No.TN-31-BC-8780.
The deceased was hit from the rear by the first respondent's mini bus, which
resulted in grievous injuries, being inflicted on the deceased. The
Appellants are the parents of the deceased and as the only legal heirs of the
deceased, they had filed the above claim petition.
3. The first respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal and the
second respondent/ Insurance Company has filed a counter inter-alia
contending that the compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- was unjust and
unsustainable. They would plead that the accident had occurred also on
account of the negligence of the deceased as the deceased had consumed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
alcohol at the time of the accident. They would further submit that the
accident had occurred when the deceased attempted to over-take another
motor-cycle and in doing so, he has gone and hit his motor-cycle on the
right side of the mini bus. They would further contend that the FIR had been
given by the brother of the deceased who had twisted the true facts and had
given a different version and not the true sequences. They would submit that
the compensation claimed is on the higher side. Therefore, they sought for
dismissal of the claim petition.
4. The Tribunal below, by order dated 29.11.2021 was pleased to
award a sum of Rs.14,12,300/- as compensation. Challenging the said
Award, the Appellants/ claimants are before this Court. The main argument
is that the notional income adopted by the Tribunal is very low and it is not
commensurate to the value relevant for that particular year.
5. According to the learned counsel for the Appellants/ claimants, the
notional income should have been fixed at a sum of Rs.12,000/- and not the
sum of Rs.9,000/- fixed by the Tribunal. The counsel for the second
respondent / Insurance Company submits that a just compensation has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
awarded and the same may be sustained.
6. Heard the counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
7. The main grievance of the appellants / claimants is the fixation of
notional income. Considering the age of the deceased and the period of
accident a sum of Rs.12,000/- can be fixed as the notional income and
future prospects of 40% has to be added. Therefore, the amount awarded
under the head of loss of income has to be enhanced to a sum of
Rs.18,14,400/-, which is re-worked as follows:
Loss of Income Amount in
Rs.
Notional income (Per month) 12,000
Add: Future Prospects (Rs.12,000 x 40%) 4,800
(Per month)
16,800
Less: Personal expenses (50%, since 8,400
bachelor) (Rs.16,800/- x 50%) (Per month)
8,400
Notional income (per annum) (Rs.8,400/- x 1,00,800
12)
Total 18,14,400
8. Considering the fact that only a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
awarded under the head of love and affection, awarding Rs.10,000/- each to
the Appellants, this amount definitely should be increased to keep it tune to
the guidelines set out in the case of National Insurance Company Limited
Vs. Pranay sethi and others reported in 2017 (16) Supreme Court Cases
680. Therefore, each of them are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- and the
amount under the head of loss of love and affection is increased to a sum of
Rs.80,000/-. Therefore, the modified compensation is as follows:
Heads Awarded Awarded by
by the this Court
Tribunal (Amount in
(Amount Rs.)
in Rs.)
Loss of Income 13,60,800 18,14,400
Loss of love and affection (Rs.40,000 x 2) 20,000 80,000
Transport Expenses 15,000 15,000
Funeral Expenses 16,500 16,500
Total 14,12,300 19,25,900
9. The appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award of the
Tribunal is modified, enhancing the compensation amount from
Rs.14,12,300/- to Rs.19,25,900/-. The second respondent-Insurance
Company is directed to deposit the said amount to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.4381 of 2018 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs as awarded
by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already deposited, within a period
of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such
deposit being made, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the award
amount, along with proportionate interest and costs as awarded by the
Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already withdrawn. The claimants are
directed to pay the necessary Court fee for the enhanced compensation
amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not disburse the enhanced
amount till such time the certified copy showing proof of payment of Court
fee is produced by the claimants. In other respects, the Award of the
Tribunal is hereby confirmed. There shall be no order as to costs in the
present appeal.
05.04.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
ab
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
I Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Cuddalore
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section, Madras High Court,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
P.T. ASHA, J,
ab
C.M.A. No.383 of 2022
05.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
