Madras High Court
The Branch Managaer vs Malliga on 22 March, 2022
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED : 22.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
and
CMP.No.4444 of 2022
The Branch Managaer,
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,
Sri Lakshmi Complex, 1st Floor, Omalur Main Road,
Bharathi Street, Swarnapuri, Salem – 636 004.
... Appellant
Vs.
1. Malliga
2.Dhivya
3.Minor Chandrasekar
4.Minor Sateesh
5.T.Devaraj ....Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, praying to set aside the decree and judgment dated 30th
August 2019 passed in M.C.O.P No.71 of 2016, by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Special District Judge Court, Dharmapuri.
For Appellant : M/s.C.Bhuvanasundari
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
JUDGMENT
The second respondent insurance company has filed an appeal
challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.71 of 2016 by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal( Special District Judge), Dharmapuri.
2. The facts in brief are as follows.
The claimants are the legal representatives of
deceased/Gowran who died in a road accident. On 11.11.2015, when the
said Gowran was walking on the Pennagaram - Dharmapuri road, he was
hit by a two wheeler coming from the opposite direction, as a result of
which, the said Gowran has sustained grievous injuries and he had
ultimately succumbed to his injuries on 13.11.2015. At the time of his
death, he was aged about 44 years and was running a Poultry Farm and also
engaged in agricultural activity. It is the case of the claimants that the
deceased has earned a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. The first claimant is
the wife and the claimants 2 to 4 are the children. They have claimed
compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-.
3. The first respondent/owner of the two wheeler remained
exparte and the insurance company, with which the first respondent's
vehicle was insured, filed their counter inter alia denying the manner in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
which the accident had occurred, the income and occupation of the deceased
and also their liability to pay compensation. The tribunal after hearing the
arguments and perusing the records held negligence solely on the driver of
the first respondent two wheeler and fixed the liability on the first
respondent. The tribunal took into account the fact that no evidence has
been produced by the claimant to prove their claim that the deceased was
earning a monthly income of Rs.25,000/- therefore, the tribunal had fixed a
notional income of Rs.10,000/- to which 25% was added towards future
prospects and a monthly notional income of Rs.12,500/- was arrived at ¼th
of the income was kept aside for personal expenses of the deceased and the
tribunal arrived at a pecuniary loss of Rs.15,75,000/-, loss of consortium of
Rs.40,000/- was awarded to the wife and no amounts were awarded under
the head of filial consortium. Compensation under other conventional heads
like loss of estate, funeral expenses etc., were granted as also the actual
medical expenses. In all the tribunal had arrived at compensation of
Rs.17,57,000/-. It is this order that is sought to be set aside by the
insurance company. The insurance company has challenged the award
primarily on the ground of quantum.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
4. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the
notional income adopted was high and it requires to be reduced. However, it
is seen that the accident is of the year 2015, the tribunal has only arrived at
notional income of Rs.10,000/- and considering the age of the deceased (44
years) has granted future prospects of 25 %. It is also seen that no amount
has been granted under the head of filial consortium for the children/
petitioners 2 to 4. The Claimants have not filed an appeal, the award of the
tribunal below is therefore very reasonable and I see no reason to interfere
with the same and the insurance company has not made out any case for the
same.
5. Accordingly, this Civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
22.03.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
ub
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(Special District Judge Court, Dharmapuri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
P.T. ASHA, J,
ub
C.M.A.No.622 of 2022
and
CM.P.No.4444 of 2022
22.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
