Madras High Court

A. Govindasamy Reddy vs P. Sai Ravi Kiran on 7 August, 2023

                                                                                C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 07.08.2023

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                                C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

                     1.A. Govindasamy Reddy
                     2.S. Padma
                     3.S. Kanchana
                     4.S. Kalpana
                     5.B. Rajeswari                                               ... Appellants

                                                          Vs

                     1.P. Sai Ravi Kiran

                     2.National Insurance Company Limited,
                       Motor Third Party Cell,
                       No.46, Moore Street, III Floor,
                       Chennai – 600 001.                                       ... Respondents
                       (R1 set ex parte before the Tribunal)
                     Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor
                     Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.03.2019
                     passed in M.C.O.P.No.1612 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident
                     Claims Tribunal, Chennai (in the II Court, Court of Small Causes) and to
                     enhance the award amount in the interest of justice.

                                        For Appellants         : Ms. M. Sunithi Abirami
                                        For Respondents        : Mr. S. Vadivel, for R2
                                                                 R1 – Ex parte

                     1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.1760 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 14.03.2019 made in M.C.O.P. No.1612 of 2016 on the file of

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

2. The appellants filed M.C.O.P. No.1612 of 2016 on the file of

the the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai

claiming a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one

Ranemma @ Raniammal, who died in the accident that took place on

11.12.2015.

3. According to the appellants, on 11.12.2015 at about 15.30

hours, while the deceased Ranemma @ Raniammal was travelling in an

Auto Rickshaw bearing Registration No.AP-26-TD-1394 on the National

Highway from Chennai to Tada direction, near Sri City Zero Cross Road,

the driver of the car bearing Registration No.AP-26-AZ-1111 drove the

same in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and hit the Auto

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

and caused the accident. In the above said accident, the said Ranemma @

Raniammal sustained grievous injuries and died in the Hospital on

13.12.2015. Hence, the appellants filed claim petition claiming

compensation against the respondents.

4. The first respondent remained ex parte before the Tribunal.

5. The second respondent filed a counter statement denying all the

averments made by the appellants in the claim petition. According to the

respondent, the Auto rickshaw was overloaded, driven in a rash and

negligent manner by the driver and while turning sharply caused injuries to

the passengers; that in any case the total compensation claimed by the

appellants is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

6. The 4th appellant examined herself as PW1 and Govindasamy,

eye-witness to the accident was examined as PW2. Eight documents were

marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. The second respondent did not examine any

witness but marked Ex.R1.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

7. The Tribunal after considering the evidence and documents

filed on the side of the appellants, held that the accident occurred due to

rash and negligent driving by the driver of the first respondent and directed

the second respondent to pay a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- as compensation to the

appellants. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have preferred the

present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

8. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the

quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre, in as much as

the Tribunal fixed only a sum of Rs.5,000/- as notional income. Though it

was established by the appellants that the deceased was working as a Coolie

and was earning Rs.500/- per day, considering the cost inflation index and

other factors, the Tribunal ought to have fixed higher notional income and

prayed for allowing the appeal.

9. The first respondent remained ex parte before the Tribunal and

hence, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that notice to first

respondent may be dispensed with and hence, dispensed with.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

10. The learned counsel for the second respondent per contra

submitted that the deceased was 55 years old and no evidence has been let

in to prove her avocation and income. The appellants 2 to 5 who are the

children of the deceased are well settled in life and are not dependants of the

deceased. In the absence of evidence, to prove the avocation and income,

the Tribunal was right in fixing the notional income as Rs.5,000/- per month

and there is no reason to interfere with the award and therefore, prayed for

dismissal of the appeal.

11. The only question in the instant appeal is-

Whether the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?

12. Admittedly, the deceased was 55 years at the time of accident.

P.W.1 had stated that the deceased was working as a Coolie and was

earning Rs.500/- per day. No documentary evidence has been produced to

establish the income of the deceased. However, considering the age of the

deceased, avocation and year of accident, this Court is of the view that it

would be reasonable to fix Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

deceased. She is entitled to 10% enhancement towards future prospects.

The multiplier applicable is 11. Since there are 5 dependants, 1/ 4 of her

income has to be deducted towards her personal expenses. Thus, the award

of compensation under the head loss of income is calculated as follows-

10,000+1,000 (10,000X10%) x12x11x3/4 =Rs.10,89,000/-. The

compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are just and

reasonable and hence the same are confirmed. Thus, the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.7,75,000/- to Rs.13,19,000/-,

break-up as follows -

                            Sl. Description                Amount          Amount         Award
                            No                            awarded by     awarded by    confirmed or
                                                           Tribunal       this Court   enhanced or
                                                             (Rs)            (Rs)        granted
                            1.    Loss of dependency       5,44,500/-    10,89,000/-     Enhanced
                            2.    Loss of estate            15,000/-      15,000/-      Confirmed
                            2.    Funeral expenses          15,000/-       15,000/-     Confirmed
                            3.    Loss of consortium        40,000/-      40,000/-      Confirmed
                            4.    Loss of love and          40,000/-      1,60,000/-    Confirmed
                                  affection               (1,60,000/-)
                                  (Rs.40,000/- each to
                                  the petitioners 2 to
                                  5)
                                         Total             7,74,500/-   13,19,000/-     Enhanced
                                                         rounded off to                     by
                                                          Rs.7,75,000/-                Rs.5,44,000/-




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.1760 of 2023

13. With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal

is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at

Rs.7,75,000/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.13,19,000/- 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 second respondent / Insurance

Company is directed to deposit the award amount, now determined by this

Court along 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 are permitted to withdraw the

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