Madras High Court
Ganga vs Exim Logistics (P) Limited on 13 October, 2022
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
1.Ganga
2.Kannabiran
3.Minor. Ramya
(Minor 3rd appellant represented
by her Mother / Guardian, Ganga,
1st appellant herein)
4.Palaniyammal
5.Chinnusamy .. Appellants
Vs.
1.EXIM Logistics (P) Limited,
Plot No.30-272, Marripalem,
Visakapatinam,
Andhra Pradesh State – 751 023.
2.Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
1st Floor, Kalinga Complex,
Plot No-B, Unit-1, Rajpath,
Bhuvaneswar,
Odisha State – 751 006. .. Respondents
(R1 remained exparte before Tribunal.
Hence, notice to R1 dispensed with)
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/10
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated
13.12.2017, made in M.C.O.P.No.642 of 2015, on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Namakkal.
For Appellants : Mr.M.Lokesh
for Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel
For R2 : Mr.M.B.Raghavan
for Ms.M.B.Gopalan Associates
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.M.VELUMANI, J.)
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants-
claimants for enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal in
the award dated 13.12.2017, made in M.C.O.P.No.642 of 2015, on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court,
Namakkal.
2.The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.642 of 2015, on
the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court,
Namakkal. They filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of
Rs.80,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Selvam, who died in
the accident that took place on 28.01.2015.
3.The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent
driving by the driver of the Trailor Lorry belonging to 1 st respondent and
directed the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.20,95,000/- as compensation
to the appellants.
4.Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal,
the appellants have come out with the present appeal.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that
at the time of accident, the deceased was the owner of the OM Shakthi
Labour Body Works at Namakkal, earning more than Rs.80,000/- per
month and the appellants proved the same by marking Ex.P10 / copy of
Lorry Builders Association Member Registration Certificate. But, the
Tribunal has fixed only a meagre amount of Rs.12,000/- as monthly
income of the deceased without considering the year of accident, cost of
inflation index, number of dependents and other factors. The Tribunal
ought to have granted compensation towards medical expenses as per
Ex.P14 / medical bills. The Tribunal ought to have granted 40%
enhancement towards future prospects instead of granting 25%
enhancement towards future prospects. The Tribunal has not awarded
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
any amount towards transportation and loss of love and affection to
appellants 2 to 5 and prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd respondent-
Insurance Company contended that the appellants have not proved the
income of the deceased. In the absence of any document with regard to
income, a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month fixed by the Tribunal as notional
income of the deceased is excessive. The deceased was aged 40 years at
the time of accident and the Tribunal considering the same, has rightly
granted 25% enhancement towards future prospects. The Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.70,000/- under conventional heads and hence, the
appellants are not entitled to any amount towards loss of love and
affection. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not meagre.
The appellants have not made out any case for enhancement of
compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as
the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurance Company
and perused the entire materials on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
8.From the materials on record, it is seen that it is the case of the
appellants that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 40 years,
owner of OM Shakthi Labour Body Works at Namakkal, earning more
than Rs.80,000/- per month. To prove the said contention, the appellants
produced the copy of Lorry Builders Association Member Registration
Certificate and marked the same as Ex.P10. The appellants have not filed
any documents like Income Tax Returns or Bank Statement to prove the
income of the deceased. In the absence of any document with regard to
income, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month as notional
income of the deceased. Considering the year of accident, age and nature
of work done by the deceased, the notional income fixed by the Tribunal
is just and reasonable. As far as the contention of the learned counsel
appearing for the appellants that on the date of accident, the deceased has
not completed 40 years of age and hence, the Tribunal ought to have
granted 40% enhancement towards future prospects is concerned, in the
absence of any materials to prove the age of the deceased, the Tribunal
considered Ex.P2 / postmortem certificate and fixed the age of the
deceased as 40 years, applied multiplier '15' and granted 25%
enhancement towards future prospects and the same is proper. There are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
five dependents of the deceased and the Tribunal has rightly deducted
1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased and granted
compensation towards loss of dependency and the same is not meagre.
The appellants produced Ex.P14 / medical bills to the tune of Rs.29,766/-
towards medical expenses incurred for the deceased. The Tribunal has not
considered Ex.P14 / medical bills and has not granted any amount
towards medical expenses. The appellants are entitled to a sum of
Rs.29,766/- towards medical expenses as per Ex.P14 / medical bills. The
Tribunal has not granted any amount towards parental consortium and
filial consortium. The appellants 2 & 3, children of the deceased are
entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards parental consortium and
the appellants 4 & 5, being the parents of the deceased are entitled to a
sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium. The Tribunal has not
awarded any amount towards transportation. The appellants are entitled
to a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transportation. The amounts awarded by
the Tribunal under other heads are just and reasonable and hence, the
same are hereby confirmed. Thus, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
S. Description Amount Amount awarded Award
No awarded by by this Court confirmed or
Tribunal (Rs) enhanced or
(Rs) granted
1. Loss of dependency 20,25,000/- 20,25,000/- Confirmed
2. Loss of consortium to 40,000/- 40,000/- Confirmed
1st appellant
3. Funeral expenses 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
4. Loss of estate 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
5. Parental consortium - 80,000/-
to appellants 2 & 3 (Rs.40,000/- each) Granted
6. Filial consortium to - 80,000/-
appellants 4 & 5 (Rs.40,000/- each) Granted
7. Transportation - 10,000/- Granted
8. Medical expenses - 29,766/- Granted
Total Rs.20,95,000/- Rs.22,94,766/- Enhanced by
Rs.1,99,766/-
9.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed
and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.20,95,000/- is
hereby enhanced to Rs.22,94,766/- together with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The
respondents are directed to deposit the award amount, now determined
by this Court along with interest and costs, less the amount already
deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this judgment, to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.642 of 2015, on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court,
Namakkal. On such deposit, the appellants 1, 2 & 4 are permitted to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
withdraw their respective share of the award amount now determined by
this Court as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along
with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any, already
withdrawn by making necessary applications before the Tribunal. The
share of the minor 3rd appellant is directed to be deposited in any one of
the Nationalized Banks, till the minor 3rd appellant attains majority. On
such deposit, the 1st appellant, being the Mother of the minor 3 rd appellant
is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months for the
welfare of the minor 3rd appellant. Out of the award amount, the 5th
appellant, Father of the deceased is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/-
towards filial consortium, now determined by this Court along with
proportionate interest and costs. The appellants are not entitled to any
interest on the amount of Rs.1,99,766/-, now enhanced by this Court as
per the order of this Court dated 20.09.2022 made in C.M.P.No.11990 of
2021 in C.M.A.SR.No.59234 of 2021. No costs.
(V.M.V., J) (S.M., J)
13.10.2022
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
To
1.The Additional District Judge,
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Namakkal.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court,
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
krk
C.M.A.No.2182 of 2022
13.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
