Madras High Court
E.Mohamed Ali vs S.Senthil Kumar on 11 August, 2023
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.1377 of 2023
1.E.Mohamed Ali
2.Sharbunisha .. Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Senthil Kumar
2.Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.,
Legal Claims Office, No.6, 6th Floor,
Reliance House, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. .. Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the order made in M.C.O.P.No.2971 of 2019
dated 18.07.2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Chief
Judge, Court of Small Causes, at Chennai).
For Appellants : Mr.S.K.Raghavan
For Respondent
(For R1) : Exparte
(For R2) : Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan
_____
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants
challenging the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the
award dated 18.07.2022 made in M.C.O.P.No.2971 of 2019 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes,
Chennai.
2.The appellants filed M.C.O.P. No. 2971 of 2019 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes,
Chennai, claiming a sum of Rs.53,97,600/- as compensation for the death of
one M.A.Fazhulul Rahman, who died in a motor accident that took place on
01.11.2018.
3. According to the appellants, on 01.11.2018 at about 6.30 p.m., while
the son of the appellants was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle
bearing registration No.TN73-S-8569 on Tambaram-Sriperumbudur Road
towards Sriperumbudur, near Navallur opposite to Madras Engineering
Industries, a TATA Truck heavy vehicle bearing Registration No.TN19-AA-
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
0074, which came from the opposite direction driven in a rash and negligent
manner hit against the motorcycle and caused the accident. In the above said
accident, the said M.A.Fazhulul Rahman sustained fatal injuries and died on
the spot. Hence, the appellants filed claim petition claiming compensation
against the respondents.
4. The 2nd respondent filed counter statement denying all the averments
made by the appellants in the claim petition and stating that the petition is
liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties, that hence the 2 nd
respondent is not liable to pay compensation to the appellants; and that in any
event the total compensation claimed by the appellants was excessive and
prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. The 2nd appellant examined herself as PW1, one Mr.M.Elamvazhuthi,
eye-witness to the accident as PW3, and one Mrs.Rajathi, Proprietrix of Auto
Flux Technologies as PW4. The Respondent neither examined any witness
nor marked any documents.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
6. The Tribunal after considering the evidence and documents filed on
the side of the appellants, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent driving of the TATA Truck and directed the 2nd respondent to pay a
sum of Rs.19,74,826/- as compensation to the appellants. Aggrieved by the
said order, the appellants have preferred the present appeal, seeking
enhancement of compensation.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre. The learned
counsel further submitted that though appellants examined P.W.4 to prove the
income of the deceased, the Tribunal has fixed meagre notional income as
Rs.12,000/-. The deceased was an Engineering Graduate and was working as
a Project Engineer in M/s.Auroflux Technologies Private Limited, earning a
sum of Rs.19,000/- plus Rs.10,000/- by way of other allowances
(Miscellaneous Allowances) in all Rs.29,000/- per month. In the absence of
any contra evidence, the Tribunal ought to have considered the said amount
as monthly income. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellants prayed
for enhancement of compensation.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that
even as per the documents filed on behalf of the appellants, the deceased was
only receiving Rs.12,000/- per month. The entries in the Bank Passbook
would reveal that Rs.12,000/- was only credited to the account of the
deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal was right in fixing the monthly income of
the deceased as Rs.12,000/- per month. The award of compensation under the
other heads are just and reasonable and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as 2 nd
respondent and perused the materials available on record.
10. The only issue involved in the instant appeal is whether the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable.
11. The appellants questioned the award only with regard to fixing of
the notional income of the deceased. The documents filed on behalf of the
appellants revealed that a sum of Rs.12,000/- was credited to the account of
the deceased every month by his employer, who was examined as P.W.4.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
However, it is seen that P.W.4 has deposed that the deceased was also earning
Night allowances and other allowances like Conveyance Allowances and
Travelling Allowances to the tune of Rs.8,000/- per month besides the regular
salary. P.W.4 has also stated that the gross income of the deceased was a sum
of Rs.20,000/- at the time of accident.
12. The Conveyance Allowance and Travelling allowance cannot be
treated as his income. However, the deceased would have earned Night
allowance as stated by PW4 and hence Rs.3,000/- can be added while fixing
the income. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it would be just and
reasonable to fix the notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per
month, taking into consideration all the aforesaid facts. The deceased was
aged 23 years at the time of accident. Hence, the appellants are entitled to get
40% towards Future Prospects and the applicable multiplier is 18. The
deceased died as a bachelor. Thus, deducting 50% towards personal expenses,
the award of compensation under the Head 'Loss of Income' is calculated as
follows:-
Rs.15,000/-+Rs.6,000/- (15000X40%) X 12 X 18 X 50% = Rs.22,68,000/-
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
13. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are
just and reasonable and hence the same are confirmed. Thus, the total award
of the Tribunal is modified in the following manner:
Sl. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of dependency 18,14,400/- 22,68,000/- Enhanced
2. Loss of Estate 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
3. Loss of Consortium 80,000/- 80,000/- Confirmed
Rs.40,000/-
(Each)x2
4. Medical Expenses 50,426/- 50,426/- Confirmed
4. Funeral expenses 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed
Total 19,74,826/- 24,28,426/- Enhanced
by Rs.4,53,600/-
14. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.19,74,826/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.24,28,426/- together with interest at
7.5% per annum (excluding the default period, if any) from the date of
petition till the date of deposit. The 2nd respondent / Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the award amount, now determined by this Court along
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a
period of six (6) weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this Judgment.
On such deposit, the appellants 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw their share
of the award amount along with proportionate interest and costs, less the
amount if any, already withdrawn, on the basis of apportionment fixed by the
Tribunal. The appellants are directed to pay the necessary Court Fee, if any,
on the enhanced award amount. No costs.
11.08.2023
kak
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To
1. The Chief Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2. The Section Officer
VR Section,
High Court, Madras.
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. No.1377 of 2023
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
kak
C.M.A. No. 1377 of 2023
11.08.2023
_____
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
