Madras High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Moorthy on 28 March, 2023
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
C.M.A.(MD)No.666 of 2022
and C.M.P.(MD)No.5712 of 2022
The Divisional Manager,
United India Insurance Company Limited,
Door No.146/M, Kumar Complex,
2nd Floor, Anna Salai, Thirusenkoodu,
Namakkal District. ... Appellant / 2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.Moorthy
2.M.Mariyammal
3.Bhuvaneswari ... Respondents 1 to 3 /
Petitioners
4.Santhoskumar
... 4th Respondents / 1st respondent
PRAYER: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.112 of
2018, dated 13.12.2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fast
Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai.
For Appellant : Mr.J.S.Murali
For Respondents : Ms.P.Selvakamatchi for R1 to R3
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai in M.C.O.P.No.112 of 2018,
dated 13.12.2021, the appellant – Insurance Company has filed this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to herein, as per
their own ranking before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts, leading to the filing of this Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal, are as follows:-
The deceased Vinoth was a bachelor and aged about 24 years and he was
earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month, by working as a Driver and also attending
the repair works on Refrigerator and Air Conditioner. On 12.05.2018, at about
8.00 p.m., while the deceased was driving his Two wheeler, bearing
Reg.No.TN-63-AK-2143 in the Thanjavur to Manamadurai National Highway, a
Borewell Lorry, bearing Registration No.TN-02-F-8329, came from the opposite
direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Two Wheeler. As
a result, the deceased was thrown away and succumbed to injuries. Hence, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
petitioners, who are the parents and sister of the deceased, have filed the claim
petition.
4. The 2nd respondent – Insurance Company has not disputed the
accident, but only disputed the income of the deceased.
5. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the petitioners, two witnesses were
examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 and 12 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P12.
On the side of the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company, no evidence was adduced
and no document was marked.
6. The Tribunal, after considering the pleadings, oral and documentary
evidence, has fixed the following compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5%
per annum:
S.No Heads Amount
1. Loss of income / dependency Rs.24,19,200/-
2. Funeral Expenses Rs. 26,000/-
3. Love and affection Rs. 1,50,000/-
4. Parental Consortium Rs. 80,000/-
5. Loss of Estate Rs. 2,800/-
Total Rs.26,78,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
Challenging the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by
the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company / Appellant.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent – Insurance
Company / appellant has not disputed the negligent aspect. However, he has
disputed only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The learned
counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company / appellant
submitted that the Tribunal has fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.
12,000/-, which is on the higher side. Besides, the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd
towards personal expenses instead of deducting 1/2. That apart, the Tribunal has
also awarded excess amount towards funeral expenses and parental consortium.
Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is liable to be reduced.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners 1 to 3 / respondents 1 to
3 submitted that the Tribunal has rightly arrived the monthly income of the
deceased at the rate of Rs.12,000/-, based on Ex.P12-salary certificate issued by
the employer. Therefore, the notional monthly income fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.
12,000/-, particularly when the accident took place in the year 2018, cannot be
found fault with. However, in respect of the deduction made by the Tribunal, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners 1 to 3 / respondents 1 to 3 has fairly
submitted that the deduction ought to have been made at the rate of 50% since, the
deceased was a bachelor.
9. In view of the above submissions, now the points arise for consideration
in this appeal are as follows:
1.Whether the Tribunal is correct in fixing the notional income
at Rs.12,000/- per month?
2. Whether the Tribunal is right in awarding the compensation
as arrived by it?
10. On a perusal of the evidence, it is seen that the deceased was aged about
24 years and to substantiate the same, Ex.P4 to Ex.P6 have been filed. Besides, to
prove the salary of the deceased, an independent witness was examined as P.W.2,
who is the employer of the deceased, through him Ex.P12-salary certificate was
marked. Though a sum of Rs.15,000/- salary have been found place in Ex.P12-
salary certificate, the Tribunal considering the age and avocation of the deceased,
fixed the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/-. Therefore, this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
Court is of the view that, considering the extra curricular activities and the skills
owned by the deceased and he was also working as a Driver under SKM Lorry
service, the notional income fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.12,000/- per month,
cannot said to be excessive one. Accordingly, the same does not require any
interference and a sum of Rs.12,000/- is taken as the notional income of the
deceased and if 40% is added towards future prospects, the notional income would
come at Rs.16,800/- and if ½ is deducted towards personal expenses, the income
would come at Rs.8,400/-. Since the deceased was aged about 24 years, the
correct multiplier is '18'. Hence, if '18' multiplier is applied, the total loss of
income / dependency would come at Rs.18,14,400/- (8,400 x 12 x 18). Further,
the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.26,000/- towards funeral expenses, which is
on the higher side. Hence, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is fixed towards funeral expenses.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of love and
affection to all the three petitioners, which is on the higher side. Hence, a sum of
Rs.40,000/- each to the petitioners 1 to 3 is awarded towards loss of love and
affection. Though a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- has been awarded towards loss of love
and affection, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards parental
consortium, which is unreasonable and therefore, the same is hereby deleted. The
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,800/- towards loss of estate, which is very low
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
and therefore, the same is enhanced to Rs.15,000/-. Accordingly, the modified
compensation is as follows:
S. Heads Amount
No
1. Loss of income / dependency Rs.18,14,400/-
2. Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/-
3. Love and affection Rs. 1,20,000/-
4. Loss of Estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total Rs.19,64,400/-
Accordingly, the compensation is reduced from Rs.26,78,000/- to Rs.19,64,400/-
11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
petitioners 1 to 3 / respondents 1 to 3 are entitled to get a sum of Rs.19,64,400/
(Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Sixty Four thousand and Four hundred only) as
compensation. Out of the said amount, the second petitioner / respondent No.2 ,
who is the mother of the deceased is entitled to get a sum of Rs.10 lakhs and the
petitioners 1 and 3, who are the father and sister of the deceased respectively, are
entitled to get a sum of Rs.4,82,200/- each.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
12. The 2nd respondent / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
modified compensation of Rs.19,64,400/ (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Sixty Four
thousand and Four Hundred only) with accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% from
the date of petition till the date of deposit and costs within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount if any already
deposited. The petitioners may approach the Tribunal for withdrawal of the said
amount, for filing necessary application and if such an application is filed, the
Tribunal shall pass orders for withdrawal. The excess amount, if any, shall be
refunded to the 2nd respondent – Insurance Company. No Costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
28.03.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vsm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai.
2.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A. (MD)No.666 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vsm
C.M.A.(MD)No.666 of 2022
28.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
