Madras High Court
Gomathi vs Sumathi on 31 January, 2022
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 31.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
1.Gomathi
2.Radha
3.Sumalatha
4.Minor Priyanka
Angammal (died) .. Appellants
Vs.
1.Sumathi
[R1 remained exparte before the Tribunal.
Hence, notice to R1 dispensed with]
2.The Divisional Manager,
National Insurance Company Limited,
Divisional Office, No.74-A,
Paramathi Road, Namakkal. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Award and Decree dated 11.07.2017
made in M.C.O.P.No.562 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
For Appellants : Mr.C.Kulanthaivel
For R1 : Ex-parte before Tribunal
For R2 : Mrs.N.B.Surekha
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for enhancement of
compensation granted by the Tribunal, by award dated 11.07.2017 made in
M.C.O.P.No.562 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
2. The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.562 of 2013 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge,
Namakkal. They filed the above said claim petition, claiming a sum of
Rs.12,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Thangaraj, who died in
the accident that took place on 25.01.2013.
3. The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, held that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent
driving by the driver of the Mini Bus belonging to the 1st respondent and
directed the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company to pay a sum of Rs.6,84,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
as compensation to the appellants at the first instance and recover the same
from the 1st respondent, being the owner of the offending vehicle.
4. Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants
contended that, at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 45 years,
working as Painter and was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. But the
Tribunal erroneously fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-
per month which is meagre. The Tribunal failed to consider the occupation,
income and future prospects of the deceased. The Tribunal ought to have
fixed notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month. The Tribunal
fixed a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards love and affection to all the 5 claimants
which is very meagre. There are four dependants of the deceased. The
Tribunal wrongly deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses instead of
deducting 1/4th. The Tribunal failed to grant any compensation towards loss
of consortium to the 1st appellant. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
towards funeral expenses, transportation and loss of estate are meagre and the
learned counsel for the appellants/claimants prayed for enhancement of
compensation.
6.Per contra, Mrs.N.B.Surekha, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd
respondent-Insurance Company contended that the appellants failed to prove
the avocation and income of the deceased by producing valid documents. In
the absence of any material evidence with regard to avocation and income of
the deceased, the sum of Rs.6,000/- per month fixed by the Tribunal as
notional income of the deceased, is not meagre. The Tribunal, considering the
entire materials on record, awarded a sum of Rs.6,84,000/- as compensation
to the appellants, which is excessive. The appellants have not made out any
case for enhancement of compensation and she prayed for dismissal of the
appeal.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company and
perused the entire materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
8. From the materials available on record, it is seen that at the time of
accident, the deceased was aged about 45 years, working as Painter and was
earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. But the Tribunal erroneously fixed
the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month, which is meagre
and hence, this Court fixes monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-
per month. The Tribunal has calculated future prospects at the rate of 25%,
which is just and reasonable and hence, the same needs no interference.
Considering the age of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly applied
multiplier ‘14’. There are four dependants of the deceased but, the Tribunal
has deducted 1/3th towards personal expenses of the deceased. This Court is
of the view that the 2nd and 3rd appellants are the children of the deceased and
now they are married and hence, this Court is of the view that 1/3rd deduction,
by the Tribunal towards personal expenses of the deceased, is correct and the
same needs no interference. Hence, the amounts awarded by the Tribunal
towards loss of income is modified to Rs.14,00,000/- [Rs.12,500 (Rs.10,000/-
+ 2,500/- (25% of 10,000) X 12 X 14 X 2/3].
9. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a meager sum of Rs.2,000/-
towards loss of love and affection to all the 5 claimants which is very meagre
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
and the same has to be enhanced. Hence by fixing Rs.20,000/- each to the
appellants 2 and 3, the compensation amount is calculated at Rs.40,000/-
under the head of loss of love and affection to 2nd and 3rd appellants and
Rs.40,000/- is awarded to the 4th appellant towards loss of love and affection,
who is a minor girl. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/-
towards loss of estate, which is meagre and the same is hereby enhanced to
Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses
which is also meagre and the same is hereby enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. The
Tribunal fixed a paltry sum of Rs.2,000/- towards transport expences and the
same is hereby enhanced to Rs.10,000/- Further, the Tribunal has not granted
any amount towards loss of consortium to the 1st appellant who is the wife of
the deceased. Hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of
consortium to the 1st appellant.
10.It is well settled that the Tribunal and the Courts have to award just
compensation. Though the claimants have claimed lesser compensation, the
Courts have power to grant “just compensation” more than the amount
claimed by the claimants. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
modified as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
S. Description Amount Amount Award confirmed
No awarded by awarded by or enhanced or
Tribunal this Court granted
(Rs) (Rs)
1. Loss of dependency Rs.6,72,000/- Rs.14,00,000/- Enhanced
2. Loss of love and Rs.2,000/- --- ---
affection to all the
appellants
Loss of love and --- Rs.40,000/- Enhanced
affection to the 2nd
and 3rd appellants
Loss of love and --- Rs.40,000/- Enhanced
affection to the 4th
appellant
3 Loss of consortium to ---- Rs.40,000/- Granted
the 1st appellant
4 Loss of Estate Rs.3,000/- Rs.15,000/- Enhanced
5 Funeral Expenses Rs.5,000/- Rs.15,000/- Enhanced
6 Transport Expenses Rs.2,000/- Rs.10,000/- Enhanced
Total Rs.6,84,000/- Rs.15,60,000/- Enhanced by
Rs.8,76,000/-
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.6,84,000/- is hereby enhanced to
Rs.15,60,000/- [Rupees Fifteen Lakhs and Sixty Thousands only] together
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
date of deposit. The 2nd respondent-Insurance Company is 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.562 of 2013, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Judge, Namakkal, at the first instance and recover the same
from the 1st respondent. On such deposit, the appellants 1 to 3 are permitted
to withdraw their respective shares of the award amount now determined by
this Court, as per the apportionment adopted by the Tribunal, along with
interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn by making
necessary applications before the Tribunal. The share of the minor 4th
appellant is directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Bank in
any interest bearing Fixed Deposit Scheme till the minor attains majority. On
such deposit, the 1st appellant, being the mother of the minor 4th appellant, is
permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months for the
welfare of the minor 4th appellant. The appellants are directed to pay the
necessary Court fee if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation. In
other aspects, the Award of the Tribunal shall stand confirmed. It is made
clear that the appellants are not entitled to any interest for the delay period as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
per the order of this Court dated 05.10.2018 made in C.M.P.No.15591 of
2018 in C.M.A.SR.No.52732 of 2018. There shall be no order as to costs in
this appeal.
31.01.2022
ssi
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order:Yes/No
To
1.The Principal District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
S.KANNAMMAL,J.
ssi
C.M.A.No.2368 of 2018
31.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
