Madras High Court
Ramathu vs M.Kamaraj on 10 June, 2022
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED : 10.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
Ramathu ... Petitioner/Appellant
Vs.
1.M.Kamaraj
2.The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
No.79, Uttamar Gandhi Salai,
Chennai.
3.Navaneetham
4.Marimuthu … Respondents/Respondents
(Respondents 1, 3 and 4 are set
ex parte in the trial Court)
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act against the Award and Decree dated 23.03.2017 in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.58 of 2016 on the file of the learned Special District
Judge to deal with MCOP Cases, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Villupuram.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
For Appellant : Mr.C.Munusamy
For Respondents : Mr.N.Sambath for R2
R1, R3 and R4 – ex parte
JUDGMENT
The claimant has filed the above appeal seeking an enhancement
of the compensation granted to the claimant.
2.The facts in brief are as follows:
The appellant/claimant had filed M.A.C.T.O.P.No.58 of 2016 on
the file of the learned Special District Judge to deal with MCOP Cases,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Villupuram. The above claim has
been filed seeking compensation of a sum of Rs.15 lakhs for the death
of one Thulasimani in a road accident that occurred on 15.01.2009.
The claimant/appellant is the son of the deceased who is aged about 43
years, the 1st respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle, the 2nd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
respondent is the Insurance Company and the respondents 3 and 4 are
the wife and daughter, respectively, of the deceased Thulasimani.
3.It is the case of the appellant that on 15.01.2009 about
02.30pm, when Thulasimani was walking on the Kodungai mud road
from South to North, a Hero Honda motor cycle, bearing Registration
No.TN 09 AE 7896 came in a North-South direction (opposite) and
dashed against the deceased. The deceased by reason of this impact
has sustained grievous injuries all over the body and he was rushed to
the Government Hospital, Mugaiyur then he was admitted in JIPMER
Hospital, Puducherry, where he succumbed to his injuries. Therefore,
the claimant has come forward with the above petition.
4.The petition was resisted by the 2nd respondent Insurance
Company who had denied the manner of the accident described in the
claim petition and also contended that the claim was highly exorbitant.
The Tribunal below, after considering the evidence on record, awarded
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation. Aggrieved by this low
compensation, the appellant/claimant is before this Court.
5.Mr.C.Munusamy, learned counsel for the appellant would
submit that the Tribunal has erred in adopting a notional income of just
Rs.3,000/- totally overlooking the fact that the deceased who was a
mason and an agricultural labourer could earn over a sum of
Rs.12,000/- per month. He would submit that the deceased was aged
about 55 years and the multiplier adopted should be enhanced. He
would also submit that very low amounts have been granted under
various heads and therefore, the Award has to be enhanced.
6.Per contra, Mr.N.Sambath, learned counsel appearing for the
2nd respondent would submit that this is a very reasonable award and
does not warrant a reconsideration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the papers.
8.Admittedly, the deceased was an agricultural labourer and also
undertaking the work of mason. Therefore, the notional income can be
enhanced to a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month. That apart, since the
deceased was above 60 years old and both his children, namely, the
appellant and the 3rd respondent are major and not a dependent on him
50% should be deducted towards personal expenses. Since the
appellant is over 60 years the proper multiplier to be adopted is 7 and
therefore, the notional income would be a sum of 2,52,000/- (Rs.3,000
x 12 x 7 =Rs.2,52,000/-). The 4th respondent/daughter and the
appellant are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love
and affection. Apart from that, a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of
consortium is awarded. Rs.15,000/- has to be granted under the head
of funeral expenses as against a sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded. A sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate is awarded. The enhanced
compensation would be a sum of Rs.4,02,000/-. Therefore, taking into
consideration the above aspects, the modified amount is as follows:
S.No Description Amount Amount Award
awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted or
reduced
1. Notional income Rs.90,000/- Rs.2,52,000/- Enhanced
2. Loss of consortium Rs.20,000/- Rs.40,000/- Enhanced
3. Loss of love and Rs.20,000/- 80,000/- Enhanced
affection to the
appellant/son and the
4th respondent
daughter
(Rs.40,000/- x 2)
4. Funeral expenses Rs.20,000/- Rs.15,000/- Enhanced
5. Loss of estate - Rs.15,000/- Enhanced
TOTAL Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.4,02,000/-
9.The 1st respondent is the owner of the vehicle which was
insured with the 2nd respondent Insurance Company. RW1-
Mr.Ramalingam, the officer of the Regional Transport Office, during
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
his examination has deposed that the rider of the motor cycle was not
having a valid driving license at the time of accident. Therefore, the
Tribunal has rightly directed the 2nd respondent Insurance Company to
pay the compensation and recover the same from the 1st
respondent/owner of the vehicle since it is a violation of the terms of
the policy.
10.Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. The
Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation
amount, with interest @ 7.5% per annum, less the amount already
deposited, with proportionate accrued interest and costs, to the credit of
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.58 of 2016 on the file of the learned Special District
Judge to deal with MCOP Cases, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Villupuram within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order, if not deposited earlier and thereafter recover the
entire amount from the 1st respondent/ owner of the vehicle. On such
deposit, the 3rd respondent/wife is permitted to withdraw a sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
Rs.3,22,000/- with proportionate accrued interest and costs, by making
necessary applications. The appellant/son and the 4th
respondent/daughter are permitted to withdraw Rs.40,000/- each with
proportionate accrued interest and costs, by making necessary
applications.
The claimants are directed to pay the Court fee for the enhanced
compensation amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not
disburse the enhanced amount till such time as the certified copy
showing proof of payment of Court Fee has been produced by the
claimants. No costs.
10.06.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
mps
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
To
The Special District Judge
to deal with MCOP Cases,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
P.T. ASHA, J,
mps
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
10.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
