Madras High Court

Pandiyan vs Raja on 15 June, 2023

                                                               1

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                        DATE: 15.06.2023
                                                            CORAM
                                      THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI
                                                   C.M.A.No.2010 of 2021

                      1.Pandiyan
                      2.Santhi                                        ...Appellants/petitioners

                                                             Versus

                      1. Raja

                      2.The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
                      Jawaharlal Nehru Street,
                      Pondichery.                                             ... respondents


                      Prayer : Civil Miscellanious Appeal is filed to set aside the judgment and
                      decree dated 26.03.2021 passed in M.C.O.P.No.471 of 2018, on the file of
                      the         Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,     III Additional District Court,
                      Villupuram @ Kallakurichi and enhance the award amount.
                                       For Appellants          :Mr.K.Suryanarayanan

                                       For Respondents         :Ms. S.R.Sumathy

                                                            JUDGMENT

The parents of the deceased Ramesh, who died in the road accident

that had taken place on 04.12.2018, have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous

Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Motor Accident

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Claims Tribunal, III Additional District Court, Villupuram @ Kallakurichi

in M.C.O.P.No.471 of 2018 dated 26.03.2021.

2. The above said claim petition was filed under Section 166(1) of

Mother Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the

death of their son, Thiru Ramesh in the road accident.

3.The Tribunal, after considering the entire oral and documentary

evidence, has passed an award for an amount of Rs.11,08,400/- with

interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of

deposit (excluding the period of dismissal of petition for default, if any).

4.The learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the

deceased who was a cab driver, aged about 22 years, bachelor died in a

road accident as mentioned supra and the Tribunal has fixed monthly

income of the deceased as Rs.7000/-, which is on the lower side and prayed

to fix the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.20,000/- though he was

said to have earned a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month and consequently,

enhance the compensation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company would

submit that as no proof was filed to prove the income of the deceased, the

trial Court has fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.7000/- per month.

6. The manner in which the accident occurred is not in question. The

only grievance of the appellants /claimants of the deceased is that the

monthly income as fixed by the Tribunal for the purpose of calculating the

loss of income is on the lower side and the same be modified.

7. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the entire

materials placed on record.

8.To substantiate the case of the claimants, the first claimant was

examined as PW1 and 10 exhibits were marked as Exs.P1 to P10.

Whereas, on the side of the respondents, neither any oral evidence was let

in, nor documents were exhibited.

9. It is the evidence of PW1 that on 04.12.2018, at about 0.60 hours,

while the deceased was driving the Car bearing Registration no.TN.11-AB-

6645 along Bangalore-Chennai National Highways near Mevalurkuppam,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

the driver of the first respondent who drove the vehicle, namely, lorry

bearing registration no.TN.73-L-8199 in a rash and negligent manner and

dashed against the car, resultantly the driver of the car, was succumbed to

injuries.

10. Deceased was stated to be a Cab Driver. Regarding the income of

the deceased, no proof was filed by the claimants. The Tribunal has fixed

the notional income of the deceased as Rs.7000/- per month, which

according to the learned counsel for the appellants, is so meagre.

11. As regards the fixation of salary of a driver in the case of “Kala

Devi & Others Vs. Bhagwan Das Chauhan & Others” reported in

2014(2) TNMAC 680(SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has fixed the

notional income of the deceased therein @ Rs.9000/- per month. Further, in

the case of “Parminder Singh Vs. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. and

Others” reported in 2019(2) TNMAC 145(SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court

has fixed the notional income of a driver @ Rs.10,000/- per month, for the

accident that had taken place in the year 2009. The Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of “Chandra @ Chanda @ Chandramam and another Vs.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Mukesh Kumar Yadav and Others” reported in 2021 (2) TN MAC

498(SC), fixed the notional income of a driver @ Rs.8000/- per month for

the accident that took place in the year 2016.

12. Taking into consideration of the income fixed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the above mentioned cases, in order to sub-serve the ends

of justice, this Court feels it appropriate to fix the notional income of the

deceased at Rs.11,000/- p.m. To prove the age of the deceased, the Driving

licence of the deceased is marked as Ex.P9, wherein, the Date of birth is

mentioned as 13.07.1997. Relying upon the said details, the age of the

deceased is fixed as 22 years at the relevant point of time. For the age

group of persons between 21-25, as per the law laid down in the case of

“Sarala Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another” reported

in 2009 TNMAC (1) SC, the relevant and appropriate multiplier is 18. Since

the deceased was a bachelor, 50% towards his personal and living expenses

is to be deducted. Then, as per the law laid down in the case of “National

Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi” reported in (2017) 16 SCC

680, in respect of the persons self employed or on a fixed salary for the age

group below 40 years, 40% is to be added, while calculating the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

compensation.

13. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

the above referred case laws, this Court determines the compensation

payable under the head 'Loss of dependency', as tabulated hereunder:

                            S.No.                       Description                        Amount

                            1.        Age of the deceased at the time of accident          22 Years

                            2.        Multiplier with reference to the age of the             18
                                      deceased, as per Sarla Verm's case

3. Annual salary of the deceased (Rs.11,000/- x 12) Rs.1,32,000/-

4. Future prospectus of the deceased (40% of the Rs.52,800/-

net annual salary income) (Rs.1,32,200/- x 40/100)

5. Net annual income of the deceased (Rs.1,32,000/- Rs.1,84,800/-

+ Rs.52,800/-)

6. 50% deduction towards personal and living Rs.92,400/-

expenses of the deceased (Rs.1,84,800x1/2)

7. Loss of dependency (Rs.92,400/- x 18) Rs.16,63,200/-

14. As regards the compensation granted by the Tribunal in respect of

other heads appears to be reasonable and hence, needs no interference.

Accordingly, the revised award is tabulated as follows:



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis





                          S.No.             Description             Amount          Amount             Awards
                                                                   awarded by    awarded by this     confirmed /
                                                                    Tribunal         Court            enhanced/
                                                                                                   granted/reduce
                                                                                                          d
                          1.        Loss of dependency        Rs. 10,58,400/- Rs. 16,63,200/-        Enhanced

                          2.        Funeral expenses          Rs.     15,000/-   Rs.   15,000/-     Confirmed

                          3.        Loss of Love and
                                    affection   of the Rs.            20,000/-   Rs.   20,000/-     Confirmed
                                    petitioners
                          4.        Loss of Estate            Rs.     15,000/-   Rs.   15,000/-     Confirmed

                                    Total                     Rs. 11,08,400/- Rs.17,13,200/- Enhanced to
                                                                              (Rounded off to Rs.6,04,600/-
                                                                              Rs.17,13,000/-)

15. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed

and the award of the Tribunal is enhanced to a sum of Rs.17,13,000/- from

11,08,400/- and the same is payable together with interest @ 7.5% per

annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The 2nd

respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the said amount of

Rs.17,13,000/- after deducting the amount already deposited to the credit of

MCOP No.471 of 2018 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/III

Additional District Court, Villupuram @ Kallakurichi. The

appellants/claimants are entitled to withdraw their respective shares as

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

apportioned by the Tribunal. The appellants/claimants shall pay the Court

fee for the enhanced amount. The tribunal shall not disburse the amount till