Madras High Court
United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Pavayee ... I on 29 April, 2022
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.7557 of 2022
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
SRS Towers, Mettur Main Road
Bhavani-638 301. ... Appellant/II Respondent
Vs
1.Pavayee ... I Respondent/I Petitioner
2.Kandasamy ... II Respondent/II Petitioner
3.Madheswari ... III Respondent/III Petitioner
4.Selvi ... IV Respondent/IV Petitioner
5.Kalamani ... V Respondent/V Petitioner
6.Sampooranam ... VI Respondent/VI Petitioner
7.Vijaya ... VII Respondent/VII Petitioner
8.Sengodan . ...VIII Respondent/I Respondent
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act,
1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 02.04.2018 made in
MCOP No.904 of 2010 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sankari.
For Petitioner : Ms.I Malar
For Respondents : Mr.C.Kulanthaivel
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
JUDGEMENT
The Insurance Company is before this Court challenging the
Award passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Sankari, in M.C.O.P.No.904 of 2010 dated 02.04.2018.
2.The facts in brief are as follows:
The respondents 1 to 7 herein who are the claimants before the
Tribunal had filed M.C.O.P.No.904 of 2010 claiming compensation of
Rs.10lakhs for the death of one Arumugam, the husband of the 1st
respondent herein and father of the respondents 2 to 7. The said
Arumugam who is stated to be 60 years old in the claim petition was
self employed carrying on a chicken stall. The claimants would submit
that he earned a monthly income of Rs.10,000/-. On 24.11.2009 about
11.25am, while he was walking on the Erode to Bhavani Main road, in
front of M.A.M.Loganathan Hospital, a private bus belonging to the 1st
respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent coming from North to
South direction and driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner
had hit the said Arumugam who was waking in an East to West
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
direction. On account of impact, the said Arumugam has sustained
grievous injuries and he was rushed to the M.A.M.Loganathan Hospital
for treatment. Due to the severe injuries sustained by him, he had died
seven days later. The accident had taken place only on account of the
rash and negligent driving of the driver of the 1st respondent bus.
3.The 1st respondent remained absent and was set ex parte. The
2nd respondent Insurance Company had filed their counter contending
that the deceased was himself responsible for the accident as he has not
noticed the bus while crossing the road. The age and income of the
deceased was denied as also the relation of the claimants to the
deceased.
4.The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has fixed
the age of the deceased as 60 years and a notional income of Rs.7,000/-
and after deducting ¼ towards his personal expenses adopted a
multiplier of 9 and adding 10% towards future prospects, awarded a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
sum of Rs.6,25,000/-. That apart, a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- was granted
towards loss of love and affection for all the claimants and a sum of
Rs.40,000/- for loss of consortium to the wife. The Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- for medical expenses, Rs.50,000/- for
pain and suffering, Rs.10,000/- for transportation, Rs.15,000/- for loss
of estate and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses. Aggrieved by the fact
that the Tribunal has ignored the Postmortem Certificate which shows
the age of the deceased as 66, the appellant Insurance Company is
before this Court. They have also challenged the compensation granted
under various heads.
5.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the papers.
6.Admittedly, the Postmortem report shows the age of the
deceased was 66 years at the time of accident. Despite this, the
Tribunal had proceeded to adopt the age given in the Claim Statement
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
which is per se erroneous. Once the age of the deceased is 66 years the
multiplier will also be vary and it is reduced to 5. It is also seen that
the Tribunal has granted Rs.1,75,000/- under the head of loss of love
and affection for all the claimants and also granted loss of consortium to
the 1st respondent wife. These two amounts have to definitely be
reconsidered. The accident had taken place in the year 2009. The
notional income has been fixed at a sum of Rs.8,000/-. Further, there
are seven claimants and therefore, the deduction for personal expenses
should be 1/5 as against ¼ adopted by the Tribunal. Therefore, the loss
of income should be reworked as [Rs.8,000/- x 12 x 5 x 4/5 =
3,84,000/-] and a sum of Rs.3,84,000/- is awarded under the head loss
of income. The amounts under the head loss of love and affection has to
be enhanced to Rs.2,40,000/- [6 x Rs.40,000 = Rs.2,40,000/-]. In all
other respects, it remains unaltered. Therefore, taking into consideration
the above aspects, the modified amount is as follows:
Loss of income :Rs. 3,84,000/-
Loss of love and affection :Rs. 2,40,000/-
(6 x 40,000)
Loss of consortium :Rs. 40,000/-
Medical Expenses :Rs. 10,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
Pain and suffering :Rs. 50,000/-
Transportation :Rs. 10,000/-
Loss of estate :Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral expenses :Rs. 15,000/-
--------------------
Total :Rs. 7,64,000/-
--------------------
7.Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
The appellant Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
compensation amount now determined by this Court with interest @
7.5% per annum, less the statutory deposit already made, to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.904 of 2010 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sankari, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit,
the claimants are permitted to withdraw amount with proportionate
accrued interests and costs as apportioned by the Tribunal by making
necessary applications.
The claimants are directed to pay the Court fee for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
compensation amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not
disburse the amount till such time as the certified copy showing
proof
of payment of Court Fee has been produced by the claimant. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
29.04.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking / Non-Speaking
mps
To
The Subordinate Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sankari.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
P.T. ASHA, J,
mps
C.M.A.No.1025 of 2022
and
C.M.P.No.7557 of 2022
29.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
