Madras High Court
S. Santhi vs K. Sudhakar on 14 August, 2023
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1135 of 2022
1.S. Santhi
2.K. Subramani
3.S. Thamizhmaran ... Appellants
Versus
1.K. Sudhakar
2.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
No. 45 & 46, “Arihant Plaza”,
Wall Tax Road, Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking to enhance the compensation awarded
in the Judgment and Decree dated 08.07.2021 passed in M.C.O.P. No.
4101 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, In the II
Court of Small Causes at Chennai.
For Appellants : Mr. Amar Dineshbhai Pandiya.
For Respondents : Mr. M. Jayaraj for R2.
R1 - Exparte.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
JUDGMENT
The appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the award
passed by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P. No. 4101 of 2016 dated 08.07.2021.
2.The appellants had filed a claim petition before the Tribunal
stating that on 09.05.2016, while the deceased was riding the motor cycle
bearing Registration No. TN 07 BA 2692 on Korattur Agraharam Road
near Annai Nagar Sri Venkateswara Sweet and Bakery, a water tanker
lorry bearing Registration No. TN 01 W 6458 belonging to the first
respondent driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner hit the
motor cycle, as a result of which the deceased sustained severe injuries
and died on the spot. Thus, the appellants filed claim petition claiming
compensation.
3.The second respondent filed counter denying all the averments
made in the claim petition. The accident register reveals that there was
no lorry involved in the accident. In any case, the compensation claimed
was excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
4.The first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal.
5.The appellants examined two witnesses as PW1 and PW2 on
their side and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18. On the side of the second
respondent, RW1 was examined and four documents were marked as
Ex.R.1 to Ex.R4.
6.The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary
evidence, fixed the entire negligence on the driver of the lorry and held
that the first appellant, being the mother of the deceased alone is entitled
for the compensation and directed the second respondent to pay a sum of
Rs.18,58,700/- to the first appellant. Aggrieved by the said award, the
appellants have preferred the instant appeal.
7.The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre. Though the appellant
produced Ex.P.7, the degree certificate for having completed
B.C.A.(Bachelor of Computer Application) Course, the Tribunal fixed
the notional income at Rs.12,525/- per month. The learned counsel
further submitted that the appellants also produced Ex.P.8 Bank pass
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
book to show that money was transferred to his account though they had
not let in any evidence to prove the exact monthly income. Further, the
Tribunal had awarded only Rs.40,000/- towards Loss of Love and
Affection to the first appellant and submitted that all the three appellants
are each entitled to Rs.40,000/- under the said head.
8.The first respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. The
learned counsel for the appellants submitted that notice to the first
respondent may be dispensed with and made an endorsement to that
effect in the court bundle. Hence, notice to the first respondent is
dispensed with.
9.The learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that
though the appellants claimed that the deceased was an M.B.A.,
graduate, no documentary proof was submitted to prove the same.
Ex.P.7 shows that the deceased had completed B.C.A., degree. However,
no evidence has been adduced to prove the income earned by the
deceased. In such circumstances, the Tribunal by taking into
consideration the cost inflation index has rightly fixed the notional
income at Rs.12,525/- per month and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
10.The only question involved in the instant appeal is whether the
Tribunal had awarded just and reasonable compensation.
11.The appellants had not produced any evidence to show the
exact income earned by the deceased. However, they had produced
Ex.P.7, degree certificate to prove that the deceased had completed a
B.C.A. Degree and Ex.P.8, bank pass book to show that some amount
has been credited to his account. Considering the age, educational
qualification namely the fact that the deceased completed B.C.A., degree
and the year of the accident, this Court is of the view that it would be
reasonable to fix the notional income at Rs.16,000/- per month. The
deceased is entitled to 40% future prospects since the deceased was aged
25 years. The multiplier applicable is 17. Further, 50% has to be
deducted towards personal expenses as the deceased died as a bachelor.
Hence, the loss of income would be Rs.16,000 + Rs.6,400 (40% of
Rs.16,000/-) = Rs.22,400 X 12 X 17 X 50% = Rs.22,84,800/-. The
award under the head loss of love and affection of Rs.40,000/- is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
enhanced to Rs.1,20,000/-. The award under the other heads are just and
reasonable and the same are confirmed. Thus, the award of the Tribunal
is modified as follows;
S. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by confirmed or
Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(Rs) (Rs) granted
1. Loss of income 17,88,672 22,84,800 Enhanced
2. Loss of love and affection 40,000 1,20,000 Enhanced
3. Loss of estate 15,000 15,000 Confirmed
4. Funeral Expenses 15,000 15,000 Confirmed
Total 18,58,672 24,34,800 Enhanced by
rounded off Rs.5,76,100/-
to 18,58,700
12. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.18,58,700/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.24,34,800/- together with
interest at 7.5% per annum (excluding the default period, if any) from the
date of petition till the date of deposit.
13. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the second
respondent that they have already deposited the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal and the same was withdrawn by the appellants. Hence,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
the second respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of
Rs.5,76,100/- now determined by this Court along with interest and costs
within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this
Judgment. On such deposit, the first appellant is permitted to withdraw
Rs.3,50,000/-, the second appellant is permitted to withdraw
Rs.1,50,000/- and the third appellant is permitted to withdraw
Rs.76,100/- along with proportionate interest and costs. The appellants
are directed to pay necessary Court fee, if any on the enhanced
compensation. No costs.
14.08.2023
ay
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
II Court of Small Causes at Chennai.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No. 1135 / 2022
SUNDER MOHAN, J
ay
C.M.A. No. 1135 of 2022
Dated: 14.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
