Madras High Court
P.K.Priji vs S.Govindarajan (Remained ... on 24 February, 2022
CMA.No.91 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
CMA.No.91 of 2018
1.P.K.Priji
2.P.Aishwarya (minor)
3.P.Madhavan (minor)
4.P.Sumathi (died)
(Minor petitioners 2 and 3, rep. by their mother
and Natural guardian of 1st petitioner herein)
(Amendment carried out as 4th petitioner died
by order in MP.No.1258/2015 dated 21.04.2015)
...Petitioners / Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Govindarajan (remained ex-parte
2.Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
HEAVITREE Unit No.1, 3rd Floor,
No.23, Spur Tank Road,
Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031.
..Respondents / Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 11.10.2017 in
MACTOP No.2234 of 2012 on the file of the II Small Causes Court (Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal) Chennai.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
For Appellants : Mr.M.N.Muthurajan
For R1 : Ex-parte
For R2 : Mr.S.Arunkumar
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed questioning the quantum granted as
compensation in MACTOP No.2234 of 2012 by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Chennai / II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2.The claimants in MACTOP No.2234 of 2012 on the file of the
above Court are the appellants herein. They are aggrieved by the
compensation granted by judgment dated 11.10.2017 owing to the death of
Baijunath in a road accident on 02.10.2011. The 1st claimant is the widow
and 2nd and 3rd claimants are minor children and the 4th claimant who has
since died was the mother of the deceased.
3.The brief facts are that, on 02.10.2011 at around 4.00 p.m., the
deceased was driving the motor cycle bearing registration No.TN-09-S-
9747 from Nandanam to Little Mount and at that time, the car of the 1st
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
respondent bearing registration No.TN-50-X-0830 coming from behind
dashed against the motor cycle which was driven by the deceased and as a
result, the accident occured. The deceased suffered grievous injuries and
died on the way to the hospital.
4.The first point which the Tribunal took up for consideration was
whether the accident happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the
first respondent and in answer to such point, the Tribunal affirmed the same
and held that the accident was only due to the rash and negligent manner in
which the vehicle was driven by the 1st respondent. Let me confirm that
finding.
5.Thereafter, the Tribunal proceeded to determine the
compensation payable. By judgment dated 11.10.2017, the Tribunal had
granted a total compensation of Rs.12,02,280/-. The compensation breakup
is as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
Heads Amounts
Monthly income Rs.6,000/-
30% to be added as future prospects Rs.1,800/-
Rs.6,000 x 30/100
Total monthly income Rs.6,000 + Rs.1,800 Rs.7,800/-
For the personal expenditure of the deceased 30% to Rs.5,460/-
be deducted Rs.7,800 x 30/100 = Rs.2,340/-
(7800 – 2340 = 5460)
Compensation after multiplier of 14 is applied Rs.9,17,280/-
Rs.5,460 x 12 x 14
Loss of love and affection towards 2 and 3 minor Rs.1,60,000/-
petitioners Rs.80,000/- each.
Consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
Funeral expense Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.12,02,280/-
6.The Tribunal had taken into consideration the salary of the
deceased at Rs.6,000/-. It must be kept in mind that the deceased was
working as a salesman in Pergo Design Centre and a salary certificate Ex.P8
was produced which reflected he was earing a sum of Rs.13,200/-. The
employer was also examined as a witness. Thereafter, the Tribunal
proceeded to examine the bank statement and found that the salary
mentioned was not reflected in the bank statement. It had been claimed that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
the deceased was an income tax assessee but it was observed by the
Tribunal that an assessment order was not produced. The Tribunal did not
place relieance on that Ex.P8 and determined the income at a sum of
Rs.6,000/- per month.
7.Taking into consideration the fact that the salary certificate
would reflect the actual salary of any individual and the bank statement
would contain the net amount credited after deductions, let me interfere with
the determination of the monthly income as fixed by the Tribunal and refix
it to a sum of Rs.9,000/-. The Tribunal had granted future prospects at 30%
and let me rework that at 25%. This would indicate that the income together
with future prospects would now come to Rs.11250/- (Rs.9,000 + Rs.2,250).
Thereafter, the Tribunal had deducted 30% as personal expenses towards the
deceased and and let me rework this also at 25%, and the amount would
come to Rs.8,438/- which can be rounded off to Rs.8,440/- (Rs.11,250 –
Rs.2,812). If a multiplier of 14 is adopted, then the compensation would
come to Rs.14,17,920/- (Rs.8,440 x 12 x 14 = Rs.14,17,920/-). The Tribunal
had granted a sum of Rs.80,000/- each towards loss of love and affection of
the two minor children. But I would rather grant a sum of Rs.40,000/- each
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
of the minor children under this head and the total would therefore be
Rs.80,000/- The Tribunal had granted a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss
of consortium. Let me revise that to Rs.40,000/-. The Tribunal had granted a
sum of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses, which can be reduced to
Rs.15,000/-. The total compensation amount now granted is Rs.15,52,920/-.
The Tribunal had granted interest at the rate of 9%. However, the standard
rate of interest is 7.5%. The difference in the compensation amount shall be
paid at the rate of 7.5% per annum. The apportion as determined by the
Tribunal are maintained. The compensation breakup is as follows:
Heads Amounts
Monthly income Rs.9,000/-
25% to be added as future prospects Rs.2,250/-
Rs.9,000 x 25/100
Total monthly income Rs.9,000 + Rs.2,250 Rs.11,250/-
For the personal expenditure of the deceased 25% to Rs.8,438/-
be deducted Rs.11,250 x 25/100
Compensation after multiplier of 14 is applied Rs.14,17,920/-
Rs.8,440 x 12 x 14
Loss of love and affection towards 2 and 3 minor Rs.80,000/-
petitioners Rs.40,000/- each.
Consortium Rs.40,000/-
Funeral expense Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.15,52,920/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
8.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed to that extent
enhancing the compensation which had been determined as Rs.12,02,280/-
to Rs.15,52,920/-. The Insurance company shall deposit the difference in
compensation amount i.e., Rs.3,50,640/- with interest of 7.5% from the date
of filing of the petition till the date of deposit within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the
appellants are permitted to withdraw the same and Additional Court fees if
any has to be paid. No order as to costs.
24.02.2022
smv
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking / Non-speaking order
To:-
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Chennai / II Court of Small Causes,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.91 of 2018
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
smv
CMA.No.91 of 2018
24.02.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
