Madras High Court
Kolanchi vs S.Chandirasekar on 14 September, 2022
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
Kolanchi ... Appellant / 1st petitioner
Vs
1.S.Chandirasekar
2.The Branch Manager
The National Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Branch 1,
No.35, Promnate Road
Cantonment
Trichy
Trichy District.
3.Kundumani
4.Rajagantham ... Respondents 1 to 4 /
Respondents 1, 2, Petitioners 2 & 3
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 30.09.2011
passed in M.C.O.P.No.85 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
Tribunal (Sub Court), Perambalur, insofar as the same are against the
appellant, and for enhancement of compensation.
For Appellant : Mr.P.Mani
For Respondents : Mr.D.Bhaskaran [R2]
JUDGMENT
The 1st petitioner before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Perambalur in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.85 of 2008 are the appellants before this
Court seeking enhancement of the Award passed in the above claim petition.
2. The parties, for ease of understanding, are referred to in the
same ranking as before the Tribunal.
3. The petitioners are the son and daughters of one Palaniammal,
who had died in a road accident on 29.03.2006. The petitioners would
submit that their mother who was aged 62 years at the time of the accident
was an agricultural coolie, earning a monthly income of Rs.2,000/-. On the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
said date, when she was walking on the road in a West-East direction, the
lorry belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second
respondent, bearing Registration No.TN 30 K 7231, which was driven in a
rash and negligent manner hit the deceased pedestrian from the rear causing
her death.
4. The petitioners had claimed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- as
compensation. The first respondent remained ex-parte and it was the
second respondent-Insurance Company, which has contested the claim.
They had denied the manner of accident, age, income and compensation
claimed by the petitioners. They would also allege negligence on the part of
the deceased pedestrian.
5. The Tribunal below, after considering the evidence on record,
held that the accident had occurred only on account of the rash and
negligent driving by the driver of the first respondent's lorry.
6. With reference to the quantum, the Tribunal below had adopted
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
a notional income of Rs.1,500/- and had awarded a sum of Rs.78,000/- as
compensation. The petitioners would challenge the same on the ground that
the Award was highly disproportionate and requested for enhancement of
the same.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned
counsel for the second respondent-Insurance Company and perused the
materials on record.
8. The accident had occurred in the year 2006. The deceased was
admittedly aged about 62 years and working as a coolie, there is no proof to
substantiate the said claim. However, it can be safely concluded that as a
coolie, she would have earned minimum sum of Rs.2,000/- per month and
that her annual income would work out to a sum of Rs.24,000/-, from this
1/3 has to be deducted towards her personal expenses and therefore, the
contribution to the family would be a sum of Rs.16,000/- per year. She had
died at the age of 62 years and therefore, the appropriate multiplier that is to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
be adopted is 5. Therefore, under the head of loss of income, the amount
would be a sum of Rs.80,000/-[Rs.16,000 x 5]. The petitioners are all
married and not in anyway dependent on their mother. The loss of love and
affection is enhanced to a sum of Rs.20,000/- as against a sum of
Rs.12,000/- granted by the Tribunal. Therefore, the re-worked compensation
would be as follows:-
Heads Amount by the Amount
Tribunal Awarded by this
in Rs. Court
in Rs.
Loss of income 60,000 80,000
(12,000 x 5) (16,000 x 5)
Funeral Expenses 3,000 3,000
Loss of Amenities 3,000 3,000
Loss of love and affection 12,000 20,000
Total 78,000 1,06,000
9. The appeal is partly allowed and the Award of the Tribunal is
modified, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.78,000/- to
Rs.1,06,000/-. The second respondent-Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the said amount to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.85 of 2008 along with
interest (except for the period from 14.10.2008 to 30.06.2011) at the rate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and
costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already deposited,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. On such deposit being made, the claimants are permitted to
withdraw the award amount, along with accrued proportionate interest and
costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already
withdrawn, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal. 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. In other respects, the Award
of the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. There shall be no order as to costs in
the present appeal.
14.09.2022
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
srn
To:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
1.The Subordinate Judge
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Perambalur.
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
P.T.ASHA, J.,
srn
C.M.A.No.3085 of 2013
14.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
