Madras High Court
The Branch Manager vs Amalapushpa Thiresh on 31 March, 2022
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 31.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.M.A(MD)No.947 of 2017
and
C.M.P(MD).No.9997 of 2017
The Branch Manager,
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
1st Floor, PSHM Shopping Complex,
Kulavikonam, Nedumangad,
Trivandrum,
Kerala-695 541. :Appellant/2nd Respondent
.vs.
1.Amalapushpa Thiresh
2.Kilbert Francis
3.Saji Thran
4.Benedict
5.The Branch Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited,
Micro Office,
No.1/45, B6, 2nd Floor,
JPC Building, Colachel Road,
Monday Market,
Kanyakumari-629 802 : Respondents
(3rd and 4th respondents are remained exparte before the lower Court)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside the award of Rs.8,90,000/- (Rupees
Eight Lakhs Ninety Thousand Only) passed in M.C.O.P.No.958 of 2014
dated 24.02.2016, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
Cum II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Ilango
For Respondents : Mr.A.Shajahan for R5
No appearance for R1 to R4
JUDGMENT
*************
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the award and
decree dated 24.02.2016 passed in M.C.O.P.No.958 of 2014 on the file of
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum II Additional District &
Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.
2. The case of the claimants before the Tribunal is that the
deceased, by name, Ajai Franklin was a student; at the time of accident,
he was studying IX Standard. On 05.05.2014, at 12.00 noon, while he
was travelling along with three others in a Van belonging to the third
respondent bearing Registration No.TN-74-U-4743 from Marthandam to
Thiruvananthapuram; at that time, the bus bearing Registration
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
No.KL-01-AM-3145 belonging to the 1st respondent and insured with the
second respondent was driven by his driver in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed against the Van, as a result of which, the the deceased
Ajai Franklin along with others sustained grievous injuries. Immediately,
he was taken to the Government Hospital, where he succumbed to the
injuries on 14.05.2015. Alleging that the accident had taken place due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent
vehicle, the claim petition has been filed by the parents of the deceased
claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only).
3. Before the Tribunal, the third and the fourth respondents, who
are the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle respectively,
remained ex-parte. The Insurance Company contested the claim petition
on the ground that at the time of accident, the first respondent's vehicle
has no valid permit to ply in Tamilnadu and no negligence could be fixed
on the part of the driver of the first respondent and they have also
disputed the notional income of the deceased.
4. The Tribunal, after considering the materials available on
record, held that the accident had taken place due to the rash and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent and fixed the
liability on the first respondent/owner of the vehicle, however, ordered
pay and recovery.
5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6.Based upon Ex.P1/Certified copy of FIR and the evidence of
P.W.2, the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the accident
had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the
first respondent's bus. The Tribunal also considering the material
available on record rightly, fixed the notional income of the deceased as
Rs.5,000/- per month and following the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay
Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Smt. Sarla Varma
and other vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in
2009 (2) TNMAC 1 (SC)., and correctly by applying the multiplier '15',
awarded the compensation of Rs.8,65,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs and
Sixty Five Thousand only) as loss of income and hence, on the point of
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the same is fair and
proper and there is no reason to interfere with the same. The orders
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
passed by the Tribunal directing the Insurance Company to 'pay' the
compensation to the respondents/claimants and then 'recover' the same
from the owner of the first respondent, does not suffer from any
irregularity or illegality and therefore, the same is also hereby confirmed.
7. In the result,
(i) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed;
(ii) It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the
present appellant - Insurance Company that the Insurance company has
deposited the entire award amount and permitted to recover from the
owner.
(iii) The first and second respondents/claimants are permitted to
withdraw the entire compensation awarded to them after following the
due process of law;
(iv) There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
31.03.2022
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
tta
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A(MD).No.947 of 2017
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.
tta
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Cum II Additional District &
Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A(MD)No.947 of 2017
31.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
