Madras High Court
Smt.R.Valarmathi vs A.Sundaram on 7 April, 2022
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.04.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
1.Smt.R.Valarmathi
2.V.Ravi ... Appellants
Vs.
1.A.Sundaram
2.The Manager (Legal)
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd,
Reliance Towers, III Floor,
No.6, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam,
(Opp. To Shastri Bhavan)
Chennai – 600 006. ...Respondents
(1st respondent was set exparte before the
Court below. Hence notice may be dispensed with)
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 17.07.2014 made in
MCOP No.2 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District
Court-II), Kanchipuram.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Prabakarn
For Respondents : R1-Ex parte
Mr.S.Arunkumar for R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
JUDGMENT
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded by the order dated 17.07.2014 made
in MCOP No.2 of 2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Kanchipuram.
2. Necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case of
the appellants/claimants and also to find out whether the appellants are entitled
for the reliefs as prayed in this Appeal.
3. The appellants are the parents of the deceased Srikanth who died in a
road accident on 22.11.2010 at about 04.30 pm. When the minor Srikanth was
standing opposite to Mani Provisional stores on the extreme left side of the mud
road, a Piaggio Auto bearing Reg.No.TN-21-AA-8120 was driven in a rash and
negligent manner, hit behind the minor and caused the accident. In the said
accident, the said Srikanth sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto belongs to the 1 st
respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent. The Appellants/claimants filed
MCOP No.02 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
District Court-II, Kanchipuram, claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as
compensation for the death of their son viz., R.Srikanth.
4. Before the Tribunal, the petitioners examined themselves as P.W.1 and
P.W.2 and seven (7) documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P7 on the side of the
claimants. On the side of the appellant/Insurance Company, one Mrs.Shanthi,
Junior Assistant attached to the Regional Transport Office was examined as
R.W.1 and one Mr.Manigandan, Legal Manager of the Insurance Company was
examined as R.W.2 and one document was marked as ExR1 on the side of the
Insurance Company.
5. The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of
the rider of the Auto belongs to the first respondent insured with the second
appellant/Insurance Company and granted a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- as total
compensation and directed that the first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/Insurer of the Auto are jointly and severally liable to pay the
compensation to the claimants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
6. Not being satisfied with the amount awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants/claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation.
7.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the
deceased Srikanth who was aged 8 years at the time of accident, was a brilliant,
young and energetic student. The Tribunal ought to have fixed the notional
income of the deceased minor Srikanth as Rs.30,000/- per annum as per the
judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (i) 2013 (2) TNMAC 358
(SC) [Kishan Gopal Vs. Lala] and (ii). 2013 (1) TNMAC 481 (1)
[Reshmakumari and others Vs. Madan Mohan and others], but, it has
erroneously fixed the notional income as Rs.15,000/- per annum and awarded a
sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards pecuniary loss. Further, the Tribunal has
awarded only a meagre sum of Rs.25,000/- towards conventional heads. In any
event, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre and prayed for
enhancement of the compensation.
8.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd
respondent/Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal computed the
pecuniary loss by taking Rs.15,000/- per annum as notional income of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
deceased minor Srikanth and applied multiplier '15' and awarded compensation,
which does not require any interference by this Court.
9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as
the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company.
10. This Court has perused the entire materials on record.
11. The appellants filed this appeal claiming enhanced compensation
for the death of their minor son aged 8 years. The facts of the case would go to
show that the deceased Srikanth was a School going child and was studying 3rd
Standard at Malayankulam Govt. Middle School at the time of accident.
Accepting that he was a non-earning member, by following the dictum laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal Vs. Lala
(supra), this Court deems it fit to fix the notional income at Rs.30,000/- per
month. Therefore, the pecuniary loss is now requantified as Rs.30,000/- X 15
= Rs.4,50,000/-. Except the above modification, the award of the Tribunal
remains unaltered on all other aspects. The compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
S. No Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Pecuniary loss 2,25,000/- 4,50,000/- Enhanced
(30000 X 15)
2 Loss of love and 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
affection
4 Funeral Expenses 10,000/- 10,000/- Confirmed
Total 2,50,000/- 4,75,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.2,25,000/-
12.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the amount awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,50,000/- is enhanced to
Rs.4,75,000/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date
of petition till the date of deposit. The 1st and 2nd respondents are jointly and
severally 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.02 of 2011. On such deposit, the appellants are permitted
to withdraw their respective share of the award amount now determined by this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
Court, along with proportionate interest and costs, after adjusting the amount if
any, already withdrawn. No costs.
07.04.2022
Index:Yes/No
msv
To
1.The District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanchipuram.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
J.NISHA BANU, J.
msv
C.M.A.No.3339 of 2014
07.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
