Madras High Court
N.Parthasarathy vs G.Neelamegam on 10 April, 2023
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
1.N.Parthasarathy
2.P.Gokul (minor)
3. P.Pavithra(minor)
4.P.Keerthika (minor)
(name amended as per order in MP.No.1336/2012, dt 08.11.2012)
2 to 4 minors rep by their father /1st appellant)
5.N.Annammal ... Appellants
..Vs..
1.G.Neelamegam
2.Future Generali India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Karumuthu Nilayam, 1st floor North Wing,
O.No.758, N.No.192, Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002. ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2014 made
in MACTOP.No.1239 of 2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (IV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai).
For Appellants : Mr.M.Mahendran
for M/s.N.M.Muthurajan
For Respondents : Set exparte - R1
Mr.E.Rajadurai for R2
for Mr.M.B.Gopalan Associates
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of
compensation under the impugned award dated 31.01.2014 passed by the IV
Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai / Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, in
MACTOP.No.1239 of 2010.
2. The appellants unsatisfied with the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award have preferred this
appeal seeking enhancement.
3. The details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the
impugned award are as follows:
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of Dependency 5,75,856/-
(Rs.4000 x 2/3 x12 x18)
Funeral expenses 10,000/-
th
Love & Affection to 4 75,000/-
appellant
Love & Affection to the 40,000/-
appellants 1,2,3 & 5
Total 7,00,856/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the
deceased was a Coolie at the time of accident and was earning a sum of
Rs.400/- per day, however, the Tribunal has erred in fixing the monthly
income of the deceased as Rs.4000/- as there is no income proof. It has
failed to note that Rs.6500/- income is taken for a coolie by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court for the accident occurred in the year 2006. Further, he
submitted that though the age of the deceased was 28 years at the time of
accident, the Tribunal has not taken into account the future prospects and
not awarded any amount towards "Loss of Estate". He also submitted that
the Tribunal also failed to grant any amount under the head of loss of
consortium to the first appellant/husband of the deceased. Also, the
compensation awarded under the other heads are very meagre and hence, he
prayed for enhancement of compensation.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/
Insurance Company has submitted that after considering the oral and
documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal has awarded a just and
reasonable compensation and therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
does not warrant any interference by this court.
6. This Court has considered the said submissions made by the
learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the second
respondent and perused the materials available on record. The first
respondent has remained exparte before the Tribunal.
7. As seen from the impugned award, the Tribunal has failed to
consider future prospects which is incorrect since the age of the deceased is
only 28 years at the time of accident. As per the decision of the Constitution
Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National Insurance
Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (2) TN
MAC 609 (SC), 40% should be added towards "Future prospects".
Accordingly, this Court grants 40% towards loss of future prospects to the
appellants/claimants.
8. It is contended by the appellants/claimants that the deceased was
working as Coolie and was earning a sum of Rs.400/- per day. However,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
no proof of income was filed to prove the income of the deceased.
Therefore, considering the year of the accident and the age of the deceased,
the Tribunal has erroneously fixed the monthly income of the deceased as
Rs.4,000/- and hence the same needs revisit. The Tribunal has erroneously
applied the multiplier '18' since the deceased was aged 28 years at the time
of accident as per Ex.P3/copy of the postmortem certificate. Therefore,
proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is '17' , as per the
decision rendered in Sarla Varma and others Vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. In the instant
case, the deceased was died as a family woman. Therefore, the Tribunal has
rightly deducted, 2/3rd of the income towards personal expenses of the
deceased. Thus, loss of dependency is calculated as Rs.6500 + 40% x 12x
17x 2/3 = Rs.12,37,600/-. Accordingly a sum of Rs.12,37,600/- is awarded
towards " Loss of dependency ". Apart from this amount, the
appellants/claimants 4 and 5 are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards " Loss
of love and affection” and the deceased died at the age of 28 years and
hence this court grants a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards "Loss of estate".
Similarly the award granted under the head of Funeral expenses at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
Rs.10,000/- seems to be on lower side and hence this court grants a sum of
Rs.15,000/- under the head of funeral expenses.
9. The Tribunal has not granted any amount under the head of loss of
consortium to the husband of the deceased, for which he is entitled to and
hence, this court grants a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium.
The compensation awarded by the Tribunal of Rs.10,000/- towards funeral
expenses is low in the considered view of this Court. As per the settled
practice, the compensation of Rs.10,000/- is enhanced to Rs.15000/-
towards funeral expenses, by this Court. The Tribunal has erroneously failed
to award any compensation towards loss of estate for which they are legally
entitled to as per the settled practice. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is
awarded as compensation to the appellants towards loss of estate.
10. For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.7,00,856/- to Rs.13,87,600/- as detailed
hereunder.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
Heads Amount Award Amount
awarded by the (Rs.)
Tribunal
Loss of Dependency 5,75,856/- 12,37,600/-
(4000x2/3x12x1 ( 6500 + 2600
8) x12x17x2/3)
Loss of Consortium NIL 40,000/-
Loss of Love & 1,15,000/- 80,000/-
affection to the (40000 /- each to the
claimants 1 to 5 appellants 4 & 5)
(75000) +40000)
Loss of Estate NIL 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses 10,000/- 15,000 /-
Total 7,00,856/- 13,87,600/-
11. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. However, the
rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal at the rate of 7.5% is confirmed.
The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced award amount of Rs.13,87,600/- along with interest and
costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, to the credit of
MACTOP.No.1239 of 2010 within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this Judgment, and thereafter, recover the same from
the first respondent/owner of the vehicle, in accordance with law. Needless
to state that the appellants shall pay necessary court fees for the enhanced
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
compensation amount before receiving the copy of this judgment. On such
deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the award amount
along with accrued interest as per the order of this Court to the
appellants/claimants through RTGS within a period of two weeks
thereafter.
12. On such deposit being made, the first and fifth appellants are
permitted to withdraw their respective shares as per the ratio apportioned by
the Tribunal by filing appropriate applications. Insofar as the minor
petitioners 2 to 4 are concerned, their share of award amount shall be
deposited in any one of the Nationalised Banks till they attain majority and
the first appellant/father of the minor appellants 2 to 4 is permitted to
withdraw the interest accrued once in three months directly from the bank.
No costs.
10.04.2023
(¼)
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
gv
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
(IV Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai).
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
A.A.NAKKIRAN., J.
gv
C.M.A.No.1343 of 2017
10.04.2023
(¼)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
