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
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
District Judge to deal with MCOP Cases, Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Villupuram.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
aged about 43 years, the 1st respondent is the owner of the offending
vehicle, the 2nd 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
claim petition and also contended that the claim was highly
exorbitant. The Tribunal below, after considering the evidence on
record, awarded 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 3rd respondent/wife, 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,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
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 Rs.15,000/- towards
loss of estate is awarded. The enhanced compensation would be a
sum of Rs.4,42,000/-. 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/-
-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1712 of 2017
mps
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
