Madras High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Perumal on 30 March, 2023
CMA No.2303 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
CMA No.2303 of 2018 and
CMP No.17590 of 2018
The Divisional Manager,
Divisional Office,
United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
No.66, 67, Gandhi Road,
Kancheepuram town and Taluk,
kancheepuram District. ... Appellant
Vs
1. Perumal
2. Rajeswari
3. Karpaga Vinayaga Hospital,
Chinnakolambakkam Village,
Palayanur Post,
Madurantakam Taluk,
Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside the award and decree, dated 10.01.2018
made in MCOP No.57 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claim
Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Madurantakam.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
For Appellant : Mr.A.Dhiraviyanathan
For Respondents : No appearance
JUDGMENT
The second respondent before the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Madurantakam in MCOP No.57 of 2013 is the
appellant in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The brief facts which would be necessary for deciding the
above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal are as hereunder:
The respondents 1 and 2 as claimants / parents of the deceased
B.Sankar, moved MCOP, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.15 lakhs
for the demise of their son. At the time of accident the deceased Sankar was
travelling in a motor cycle as a pillion rider and the bus belonging to the 2nd
respondent was driven in a rash and negligent manner without observing
traffic rules and regulations and dashed against the said motor cycle, as a
result of which, the deceased Sankar sustained multiple grievous injuries on
his head and died on spot.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
3. It is the case of the respondents 1 and 2/claimants that the
deceased Sankar was the sole breadwinner of the family and he was
working as a probationary plant operator in a private company and earning a
sum of Rs.14,000/- p.m. His age has been stated as 26 years at the time of
accident. Claiming compensation under various heads, total claim of
Rs.20,95,000/- was arrived at. However, the claimants restricted the claim
amount to Rs.16 lakhs.
4. The appellant herein as 2nd respondent in the MCOP
proceedings filed a counter denying the claims made by the respondents 1
and 2 and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. Before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent father of the deceased
Sankar was examined as P.W.1 ad one Elumalai was examined as P.W.2. On
the side of the respondents 1 and 2/claimants, Exs.P1 to P9 were marked.
On the side of the Insurance Company, no oral or documentary evidence
was let in.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
6. The Tribunal on considering the overall circumstances
including the oral and documentary evidence before him, came to the
conclusion that the accident occurred only because of rash and negligent
driving of the 3rd respondent bus. The Tribunal fixed the age of the
deceased as 26 years relying on Exs.P6 and P7. Insofar as the salary, the
Tribunal took into account of Ex.P8. Insofar as the deduction for personal
expenses, the Tribunal deducted 1/3 considering the legal heirs / the parents
namely the father and mother who are both depending on the deceased.
Finally the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.9,19,112/- as compensation
payable to the claimants/respondents 1 and 2 together with interest at 9%
per annum payable from the date of petition till the date of payment.
7. Aggrieved by the said award, the appellant Insurance Company
has preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
9. The main grounds of challenge to the award which have been
canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant are that the Tribunal
ought not to have deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased.
According to the counsel for the appellant, the deceased being a bachelor,
50 % ought to have been deducted towards personal expenses and therefore,
he sought for modification of the award in this regard. Secondly, the
learned counsel for the appellant contended that the interest fixed at 9% per
annum is excessive and 7.5% interest has to be awarded. Insofar as the other
heads of compensation, no serious challenge has been made, even in the
grounds of appeal.
10. As regards the contention regarding deduction towards
personal expenses, the fact that the deceased was a bachelor, is not the
relevant factor to be taken into account. It is the number of dependants
which would decide what would be the proper deduction towards personal
expenses of the deceased. It is the case of the respondents 1 and 2 that they
are the parents of the deceased and that the deceased son is the breadwinner
of the family and there is no contra evidence adduced on the side of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
Insurance Company to repudiate the claim in this regard. There are series of
Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court regarding
personal deduction. When the dependants are more than one, it would be
just and proper to deduct 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased.
This Court does not find any error or irregularity in the award passed by the
Tribunal in this regard.
11. Insofar as the second contention with regard to the awarding
of interest at the rate of 9 % per annum, the arguments of the learned
counsel for the appellant has merit. It is now settled by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court that the interest rate to be awarded for Motor Accident Cases is only
at 7.5% per annum and not 9% p.a. Hence, the Tribunal was in error, in
awarding 9% p.a. towards interest, which has to be necessarily set aside and
accordingly the same is set aside.
12. In fine, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed,
confirming the award amount of Rs.9,19,112/- but with a modification in
respect of the interest portion alone, to the extent that the interest rate is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
fixed at 7.5% p.a. instead of 9% p.a., payable from the date of petition i.e.,
02.08.2013, till the date of payment. The appellant/Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the award amount along with interest at 7.5 % per annum
from the date of claim petition (02.08.2013) till the date of payment, less the
amount already deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is open to the respondents 1 and 2
to approach the Tribunal to take out necessary application to withdraw the
award amount by following due process. No orders as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
30.03.2023
vum
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
To
1. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal
(Subordinate Judge) Madurantakam
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA No.2303 of 2018
P.B.BALAJI, J.
vum
CMA No.2303 of 2018 and
CMP No.17590 of 2018
30.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
