Madras High Court
Rani vs C. Boopalan on 12 June, 2023
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
Rani ... Appellant
..Vs..
1.C. Boopalan
2.Sriram General Insurance Company Limited
No.66, Thirumalai Pillai Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, as against the judgment and decree dated 13.10.2017
made in MACTOP.No.515 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal(II Additional District Judge, Poonamallee).
For Appellants : Mr.A.G.F.Terry Chella Raja
For Respondents : Mr. K.Poomalai for R2
Vakalat not filed
Exparte - R1
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the appellant/claimant seeking
enhancement of compensation under the impugned award dated 13.10.2017
passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/(II Additional District Judge,
Poonamallee) in MACTOP.No.515 of 2012.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
2. The Appellant/claimant unsatisfied with the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award, has
preferred this appeal seeking for enhancement.
3. The case of the appellant is that on 16.12.2011 at 7.10 a.m., when
the son of the claimant was travelling on the motor cycle bearing
Regn.No.TN-22-AL-9920 from Vengaivasal main road, South to North
direction, a lorry belonging to the first respondent bearing Regn.No.TN-34-
B-5250, came in the rash and negligent manner from behind and hit the
motor cycle and thereby the son of the appellant died on the spot. Claiming
that the driver of the lorry has caused the accident, the claimant has claimed
a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- before the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal.
4. The Tribunal, based on the oral and documentary evidences has
observed that the driver of the lorry is responsible for the accident and
fastened the liability on the Insurance Company as insurer of the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
respondent and ultimately quantified the total compensation at Rs.6,45,260/-
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of deposit. Aggrieved by which, the claimant / appellant is before this
Court.
5. Before the Tribunal, the Appellant/claimant has examined two
witnesses as PW1 and PW2 and filed six documents which were marked as
Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. On the side of the second respondent/Insurance Company,
neither witness was examined nor document marked.
6. The learned counsel for the Appellant/claimant has submitted that
the award of the Tribunal are against law, weight of evidence and
probabilities of the case. The Tribunal has completely ignored the valid plea
raised by the appellant and on the other hand, taken into consideration the
case of the respondent and awarded less compensation as against the claim
of the appellant. The Tribunal failed to consider the age of the deceased is
20 years and fixed Rs.5000/- p.m., It ought not to deduct 1/3rd as the
personal expenses of the deceased. There was no earning member other than
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
the deceased since the father of the deceased also pre-deceased him. It ought
to award reasonable compensation under the head of pain and sufferings
because he could suffered some pain till his death due to the accident. It
ought to award compensation under the head of mental agony, loss of estate,
damage of cloth and articles, filial consortium , transport expenses and
future prospects. It ought to award more compensation under the head of
love and affection of the appellant and funeral expenses,. It ought to adopt
the proper multiplier while calculating compensation. In any event, the
award of the Tribunal is low. Hence, he prays for enhancement of the Award
amount.
7. It is contended by the Insurance Company that the Tribunal has
rightly granted reasonable compensation and thus awarded a total
compensation of Rs.6,45,260/- and the same does not warrant any
interference by this court.
8. A perusal of the records show that the Tribunal has not awarded
any amount towards Future Prospects. As per the decision of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
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". The age of the deceased was 20 years on the date of accident and
therefore, proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is '18', as per
the decision rendered in Sarla Varma and others vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121. The Tribunal has
failed to consider that the deceased would be earning more if he would be
alive. In the instant case, the deceased died as a bachelor. Therefore, 50% of
income should be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased.
Since the year of the accident is 2011, this court fix the income of the
deceased at Rs.8000/-. Thus, loss of dependency is calculated as 8000 +
40%=3200; 8000 + 3200 =11200; 11200 - 1/2 = 5600; Thus it works out
as 5600 x 12 x 18 = 12,09,600/-. Accordingly a sum of Rs.12,09,600/- is
awarded towards " Loss of dependency ".
9. However, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards
funeral expenses and love and affection are high in the considered view of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
this Court. As per the settled practice, the compensation towards funeral
expenses is reduced from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.15,000/-. Similarly, the
compensation towards love and affection is reduced from Rs.1,00,000/- to
Rs.40,000/-.by this Court. The Tribunal has erroneously failed to award any
compensation towards loss of estate for which she is legally entitled to as per
the settled practice. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded as
compensation to the appellant towards loss of estate.
10. For the foregoing reasons, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.6,45,260/- to Rs.12,79,600/- as detailed
hereunder.
Heads Amount Award Amount
awarded by the (Rs.)
Tribunal
Loss of Income 5,20,260/- 12,09,600/-
(3335 x12 x13) (5600 x 12 x18)
Love and Affection 1,00,000/- 40,000/-
Loss of Estate NIL 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses 25,000/- 15,000 /-
Total 6,45,260/- 12,79,600/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
Conclusion:
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 2nd respondent / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
modified award amount i.e, Rs.12,79,600/- along with interest and
costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, to the
credit of MACTOP.No.515 of 2012 within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of a 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
appellant/claimant through RTGS within a period of two weeks
thereafter. No costs.
12. Since the compensation amount now awarded is Rs.12,79,600/- ,
it is made clear that the claimant has to pay the appropriate Court fee in
order to receive the enhanced amount.
12.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
gv
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
gv
To
1. The (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal),
II Additional District Judge, Poonamallee).
2.The Section Officer
V.R.Section,
High Court of Madras.
C.M.A.No.4094 of 2019
12.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
