Madras High Court

M.Radhika vs Thanga Kamalakannan on 1 March, 2022

                                                                         C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                   DATED: 01.03.2022
                                                        CORAM:
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
                                             C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

                     1.M.Radhika
                     2.Minor Manoj
                     3.Minor Sugeetha
                     4.Palaniammal                         ...Appellants in CMA.No.1008 of 2017

                     Minor Mounahari                        ...Appellant in CMA.No.1009 of 2017

                                                           Vs.

                     1.Thanga Kamalakannan

                     2.M/s.National Insurance Company Limited,
                       Divisional Office No.1, LRN Complex,
                       Saradha College Road,
                       Salem – 636 007.                             ..Respondents in both CMAs

Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 11.07.2016 made in MCOP.No.1942 of 2013 on the file of the Special District Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Salem.

For Appellants in both CMAs : Mr.K.Kuppusamy For Respondents in both CMAs : Mrs.Sree Vidya for R2 R1 - Exparte

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

COMMON JUDGMENT The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.1008 of 2017 has

been filed owing to the death of one Muthukumar, who aged 34 years old

and the claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and his

widow and two minor children and also his mother. C.M.A.No.1009 of

2017 had been field by one of the minor child represented by mother, owing

to injuries suffered.

2.The brief facts are that, on 22.07.2013 at around 8.00 p.m., near

Angalamman Kovil in Trichy to Coimbatore main road on Palladam, when

the deceased / Muthukumar was driving a motor cycle bearing registration

number TN-42-D-1116, a Van bearing registration number TN-28-AY-7274,

said to be driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motor cycle and

caused an accident. It must also be mentioned that the said Muthukumar

was riding along with his relative, Mounhari, who was the pillion rider.

Due to the accident, Muthukumar suffered grevious injuries all over the

body and was initially admitted in Government Hospital at Palladam and

then, shifted to KG Hospital. He died on 03.07.2013.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

3.Claiming that the accident occurred due to the rash and

negligent driving of the Van bearing registration number TN-28-AY-7274,

his legal representatives have filed M.C.O.P.No.1942 of 2013 before the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Salem, seeking compensation. For the

injuries suffered, minor Mounahari represented by his mother, filed

M.C.O.P.No.1946 of 2013 also before the very same Tribunal.

4.Both the petitions were taken up for consideration and a

common judgment was passed on 11.07.2016. While determining the

issues, the Tribunal had determined that the accident occurred due to the

rash and negligent driving of the aforementioned Van and in view of that

categorical finding, let me not enter into any discussion on that particular

aspect.

5.Mr.K.Kuppusamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants

however urged that the compensation granted required revisitation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

6.A perusal of the judgment in M.C.O.P.No.1942 of 2013 shows

that the Tribunal had taken into consideration, Exs.P12 and P13, which

reflected that Muthukumar, was having a chappal shop and was doing

business and Ex.P13 is actually a document, which reflected purchase of

stock.

7.The Tribunal, in the absence of any of the documents relating to

the income earned through such business and also in the failure to produce

income tax assessment certificates with respect to the income of the

deceased, proceeded to determine the monthly income at Rs.9,000/- per

month. Since the deceased Muthukumar was aged 37 years, a multiplier of

15 was taken into consideration and after deducting ¼th towards his pesonal

expenses and retaining ¾th towards contribution to the family, determined

the loss of income at Rs.12,15,000/-. There were compensations granted

under other heads, which were not seriously disputed by the learned counsel

for the appellants.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

8.With respect to the income, let me reexamine the particular

reasoning given by the Tribunal and as a matter of fact Exs.P12 and P13

establish the fact that the deceased was doing business in purchase and sale

of slippers, which might earn reasonable income and therefore, I would fix

the monthly income at Rs.10,000/- per month. One particular aspect, which

had not been taken into consideration is the future prospects at 40% and

after taken into consideration ¼th towards personal expenses, the monthly

income would be Rs.11,500/- per month. The total loss of income would be

(11,500 X 12 X 15) = Rs.20,70,000/-. The final compensation granted is as

follows:

                                                  Heads                                 Amounts
                          Loss of future income                                      Rs.20,70,000/-
                          (11,500 X 12 X 15)
                          Loss of love and affection for the petitioners 2 and 3      Rs.1,00,000/-
                          Loss of consortium                                             Rs.40,000/-
                          Loss of love and affection for the 4th petitioner              Rs.10,000/-
                          Medical Bills as per Ex.P8                                     Rs.70,095/-
                          Funeral Expenses                                               Rs.25,000/-
                                                                              Total Rs.23,15,095/-







https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                            C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

9.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to that extent

enhancing the compensation which had been determined as Rs.14,60,095/-

to Rs.23,15,095/-. The Insurance company shall deposit the difference in

compensation amount i.e., Rs.8,55,000/- with interest at 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. The ratio of compensation

amount apportioned between the claimants as ordered by the Tribunal will

remain the same. On such deposit, the appellant 1 and 4 are entitled to

withdraw the amount. Since the appellants 2 and 3 were aged 15 and 10

years in the year when the claim petition is filed, now, they might have

become major. On obtaining necessary orders from the Tribunal, they are

permitted to withdraw the compensation amount payable to them.

10.In so far as C.M.A.No.1009 of 2017 is concerned, the Tribunal

had granted Rs.2,23,415/- for the injuries suffered to the minor and had

determined a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards future income and determined

Rs.2,000/- per percentage for 35% diability. The same would require

interference, I would grant a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for 35%

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

disability, which would be Rs.1,05,000/-. The compensation granted under

the other heads remain same. The compensation granted is modified as

follows:-

                                                Heads                                 Amount
                        Loss of future income                                    Rs.1,05,000/-

At Rs.3,000/- per pecentage of disability (3,000 x 35) Attender charges Rs.5,000/-

                        Transport expenses                                       Rs.6,300/-
                        Expenses for X-ray as per Ex.P22                         Rs.900/-
                        Extra nourishment                                        Rs.10,000/-
                        Medical expenses as per bills                            Rs.1,31,215/-
                                                                          Total Rs.2,58,415/-

11.The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed to that extent

enhancing the compensation which had been determined as Rs.2,23,415/- to

Rs.2,58,415/-. The Insurance company shall deposit the difference in

compensation amount i.e., Rs.35,000/- with interest at 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. The compensation amount

of Rs.1,00,000/- should be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.Nos.1008 & 1009 of 2017

until the claimant becomes major. The mother is permitted to withdraw the

interest once in three months. The remaining amount can be withdrawn, by

his mother on filing application before the Tribunal.

12.With the above observations, both the appeals are allowed. No