Madras High Court
M/S.United India Insurance Co. ... vs Vasantha on 28 January, 2022
CMA No.1123 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
CMA No.1123 of 2020
and CMP No.7055 of 2020
M/s.United India Insurance Co. Ltd
Branch Office-2, No.77, Oriental Complex
A.A. Street, Salem - 1 ... Appellant
Vs
1.Vasantha
2.Sathishkumar
3.Sasikumar
4.Kousalya ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and Decree dated 17.07.2017
passed in M.C.O.P. No.173 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal (Sub-court) at Sankari.
For Appellant : Mrs.I.Malar
For Respondent : Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj for R1 to R3
No Appearance for R4
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
JUDGMENT
Challenge in this appeal is by the insurance company to the award
of a sum of Rs.9,80,000/- for the death of one Ramasamy, who was aged
about 62 years, in a road accident that occurred on 26.04.2015. The
claimants, who are the wife and children of the said Ramasamy, sought for
compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-, contending that the accident occurred due
to the rash and negligent driving of the car bearing Registration No.TN-27
P-6399, owned by the fourth respondent and insured with the
appellant/insurance company.
2. Claiming that the deceased was earning about Rs.20,000/- per
month, the claimants would quantify the loss of dependency at
Rs.11,00,000/- and also claim conventional damages.
3. The insurance company resisted the claim contending that the
accident did not occur in the manner suggested by the claimants. It has also
contended that the deceased himself contributed to the accident. The
quantum of compensation claimed was termed as excessive.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
4. Before the Tribunal, the first claimant was examined as PW1
and two other witnesses were examined as PWs.2 and 3 and Exs.P1 to P14
were marked. There was no evidence let in on the side of the insurance
company. The owner of the car, remained ex-parte.
5. The Tribunal, on consideration of the evidence on record
concluded that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving
of the driver of the car. In arriving at the said conclusion, the Tribunal relied
upon the first information report, which was marked as Ex.P1 and the
Accident Register, marked as Ex.P2 and the absence of any contra evidence
on the side of the insurance company. On the quantum, the Tribunal adopted
the notional income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- per month, added 15%
towards future prospects, deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the
deceased and arrived at the annual loss of dependency at Rs.92,000/-,
applying the multiplier of 7, the Tribunal fixed the total loss of dependency
at Rs.6,45,000/-. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of
consortium to the first claimant, the wife and a further sum of Rs.1,50,000/-
towards loss of love and affection to the other three claimants. It also
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, as the deceased
was an inpatient for nearly 7 days after the accident, a sum of Rs.76,000/-
towards medical expenses, Rs.25,000/- for funeral expenses and Rs.4,000/-
towards loss of property. Thus the total compensation worked out to be
Rs.9,80,000/-. The claimants were satisfied with the award. The insurance
company is on appeal contending that the quantum of compensation is
excessive.
6. Mrs.I.Malar, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/insurance company would contend that the Tribunal erred in
adopting 15% towards future prospects for a person, who was aged about 62
years and above at the time of accident. She would rely upon a decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay
Sethi and others made in [Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 25590 of
2014], to contend that the assessment of 15% towards future prospects is
incorrect. She would also submit that the award of Rs.50,000/- for loss of
consortium is higher than the normal award of Rs.40,000/-. She would also
point out that the Tribunal has chosen to award compensation for the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
claimant under both the heads, namely loss of consortium as well as loss of
love and affection, which according to her is not proper. The award of
Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral
expenses is termed as excessive.
7. Contending contra, Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj, learned counsel appearing
for the respondents 1 to 3/claimants would contend that though the adoption
of 15% towards future prospects cannot be correct, the fact that the Tribunal
has taken the monthly income of the deceased only at Rs.10,000/- makes the
award of the Tribunal reasonable and does not call for any interference. He
would further contend that the award of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of
consortium, Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.50,000/- towards
loss of love and affection for the first claimant is reasonable. He would
further plead that the award may be confirmed, as it is reasonable on the
whole.
8. I have considered the rival submissions and the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
9. No doubt, the adoption of 15% towards future prospects may
not be correct considering the age of the deceased. However, as rightly
contended by the learned counsel for the claimants, the fixation of
Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income is slightly on the lower side,
however, the overall assessment of loss of dependency appears to be
reasonable. The accident occurred in the year 2015. As pointed ot supra
fixation of Rs.10,000/- as monthly notional income for the year 2015 itself
is on the lower side. Therefore, the adoption of 15% towards future
prospects does not result in the compensation being unreasonable. Hence I
do not see any infirmity in the award of Rs.6,45,000/- under the head of loss
of dependency.
10. I find considerable force in the contention of the learned
counsel for the appellant/insurance company regarding the award under the
heads of loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, loss of property and
funeral expenses. The Hob'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co.
Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and others made in [Special Leave Petition (Civil)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
No. 25590 of 2014] held that loss of consortium could be Rs.40,000/- and
second award towards loss of love and affection to wife is not justified.
Award of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses is also on the higher side.
Award of Rs.4,000/- towards loss of property is on the lower side. Taking
into account the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi's
case, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows:
Loss of dependency or the loss of
earning power Rs.6,45,000/-
Loss of Consortium Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of love and affection for
claimants 2 and 3 Rs. 80,000/-
Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/-
Medical Expenses (based on bills) Rs. 76,000/-
Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of property Rs. 15,000/-
-----------------
Rs.9,01,000/-
-----------------
Rounded off to Rs.9,00,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
11. The appeal is partly allowed. The award is modified as above.
The first claimant being wife, would be entitled to a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-
with proportionate interest and the entire costs awarded by the Tribunal. The
claimants 2 and 3, being daughter and son, will be entitled to Rs.1,50,000/-
each with proportionate interest. The insurance company is directed to
deposit the balance amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum,
within a period of six weeks from today. On such deposit, the claimants are
permitted to withdraw their proportionate shares. No costs.
28.01.2012
Asr
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(Sub-court) at Sankari
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.1123 of 2020
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
Asr
CMA No.1123 of 2020
and CMP No.7055 of 2020
28.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
