Madras High Court
Muthulakshmi vs Jeevarathinam on 20 April, 2023
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :20.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN
C.M.A.No.2465 of 2019
1.Muthulakshmi
2.Rajasri ...Appellants
Vs.
1.Jeevarathinam
2.Murthy
3. The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Tranquebar
Represented by its Branch Manager,
Having his office at Ground Floor, S.S.Pillai Complex
Thottam Eeezha Veethi, Porayar Town
Tranquebar Taluk and District ..Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed in
MACTOP.No.2 of 2017 dated 02.10.2018 on the file of Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (District Court) Karaikal.
For Appellants : Mr.T.Sai Krishnan
For Respondents : No appearance for R1 & R2
Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy for R3
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking
enhancement of compensation under the impugned award dated 02.10.2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Court) Karaikal, in
MACTOP.No.2 of 2017.
2. On 29.08.2016 at 11.00 a.m., while the deceased Raghavan
was riding his motor cycle bearing Regn.No. TN-51-AX-4302 with a pillion
rider at Bharathiar road, Royanpalayam, Kottucherry near Rajasthan
Marbles from North to South, a motor cycle bearing Regn.No.PY-02-K-
0284 was driven by the first respondent from opposite direction from South
to North with a pillion rider and hit on the vehicle of the deceased. As a
result of which, the said Raghavan was seriously injured and taken to
General Hospital, Karaikal, for treatment. Thereafter he was admitted in
Thanjavur Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur and reported dead on
29.08.2016. Claiming that the deceased was a fisherman earning not less
than Rs.10,000/- per day, the appellants/claimants have filed a claim
petition claiming a sum of Rs.28,00,000/-. The Tribunal adjudicated the
issues with reference to the documents and evidences. The Insurance
Company has defended their case. The Tribunal has awarded a total
compensation of Rs.11,67,000/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
3. The appellants unsatisfied with the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award have
preferred this appeal seeking enhancement.
4. The details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
under the impugned award are as follows:
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of income 11,22,000/-
Love and affection for the 25,000/-
first petitioner
Funeral Expenses 15,000/-
Transport Expenses 5,000/-
Total 11,67,000/-
5. Before the Tribunal, the Appellants/claimants examined three
witnesses as PW1 to PW3 and filed fourteen documents which were marked
as Ex.P1 to Ex.P14. On the side of the third respondent, one witness was
examined as RW1. However, no document was marked.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the third respondent and perused the materials available on
record.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants/Claimants
submitted that the Judgement and decree of the Tribunal are contrary to law,
facts, evidence and probabilities of the case. The Tribunal has erred in
fixing a low income of only Rs.8000/- for the deceased who was earning
Rs.500/- per day. It ought to have adopted a practical and pragmatic
approach in fixing the monthly income of the deceased. It ought to have
appreciated that the deceased has left behind one daughter and his wife who
are only dependent on the deceased and in circumstances just and fair
compensation should be awarded by fixing an income at Rs.30,000/- per
month. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is a lesser one. The Tribunal
erred in dismissing the claim petition as against the 2nd appellant because
she is the sister and holding that she is not the dependant. The Tribunal,
without appreciating the evidences properly, has awarded the total
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
compensation of Rs.11,67,000/- and the said quantum is unreasonable.
Hence, he prayed to enhance the compensation.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent
submitted that the compensation claimed by the appellants is highly
excessive and baseless. He further submitted that the Tribunal after
analysing the evidences on record, has rightly awarded the compensation to
the appellants/claimants and hence, the award passed by the Tribunal does
not warrant any interference by this Court. Hence, he prays for dismissal of
the appeal.
9. The Tribunal has relied upon the evidences of PW1 and PW2
which correlates with Ex.PI/FIR and Ex.P7/post mortem examination report.
It is clear that due to the effect of severe head injuries, death caused to the
deceased. The age of the deceased was 27 years as seen from the Post
Mortem Examination Report and hence, the Tribunal has taken the age of
the deceased as 27 years. Considering the age and earning capacity of the
deceased, the Tribunal fixed the monthly income of the deceased at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
Rs.8000/- per month, adding 40% of the income towards future prospects,
deducting 1/2 of the income towards personal expenses of the deceased,
adopting the multiplier of 17 (8000+3200-11,200; 11,200/2=5500 x 12 x
17 = 11,22,000/- and has arrived at a sum of Rs.11,22,000/- towards loss of
income.
10. On perusal of records, it is seen that the Tribunal has not properly
considered the evidences properly and the documents marked. Considering
the age of the deceased and rise in cost of living at the present time and also
the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view
that Rs.12000/- is to be taken as monthly income of the deceased. Since the
age of the deceased was 27 years at the time of accident, there is need to
change the multiplier as 17. Further, considering the age and earning
capacity, 40% should be added towards future prospectus and 1/ 2 has to be
deducted towards personal expenses for calculating pecuniary loss of
income. If Rs.12000/- is taken as the monthly income of the deceased, after
adding 40% towards future prospectus of the deceased and 1 /2 of the
amount is deducted towards personal expenses and the multiplier of 17 is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
adopted, the loss of income works out to Rs.17,13,600/-, (12000 x 40% =
4800), (12000 + 4800 = 16800 x 1/ 2 =8400; 8400 x 12 x 17
=Rs.17,13,600/-). Accordingly, the amount awarded by the Tribunal
towards 'loss of icome' stands enhanced to Rs.17,13,600/-. Similarly, as per
the Pranay Sethi case, it would be appropriate to enhance the award under
the head of loss of love and affection to the appellants I and 2 to Rs.40,000/-
each which would come to Rs.80,000/-, and also Rs.8,000/- towards
Transport Expenses. On perusal of records, it is seen that no amount is
awarded under the head of loss of estate for which they are entitled to.
Hence, this court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of
estate.
11. Insofar as the assessment of funeral expenses by the Tribunal is
concerned, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is a correct assessment.
Hence, it does not call for any interference of this court.
12. The details of the enhanced compensation are as under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
Heads Award Amount
(Rs.)
Loss of Income 17,13,600/-
Loss of love & 80,000/-
Affection
to the appellants 1 & 2
(Rs.40000/- each)
Loss of estate 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses 15,000/-
Transport Expenses 8,000/-
Total 18,31,600/-
13. Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to the enhanced
compensation of Rs.18,31,600/-. It is made clear that for the enhanced
amount of Rs.18,31,600/-, the interest rate of 7.5% shall be calculated from
the date of filing of this appeal. The third respondent is directed to deposit
the award amount within a period of six weeks from the date of copy of this
judgement.
14. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
15. The third respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the enhanced compensation, as ordered above, to the credit of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
MACTOP.No.2 of 2017, 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 Tribunal, in the same ratio as awarded by it, is
directed to transfer the respective shares to the claimants along with accrued
interest to the bank account of the of two weeks thereafter. On such transfer,
the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same. No costs. appellants
through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter. On such transfer,
the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same. No costs.
16. Since the compensation amount now awarded is Rs.18,31,600/-, it
is made clear that the claimants have to pay the appropriate Court fee in
order to receive the enhanced award amount.
20.04.2023
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
gv
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1373 of 2018
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
gv
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/
(District Court) Karaikal.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.2465 of 2019
20.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
