Madras High Court

Saraswathi vs Jaleel on 3 November, 2023

    2023/MHC/5019



                                                          1

                                  BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED: 03.11.2023

                                                       CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

                                            C.M.A(MD)NO.263 OF 2021

                     1.Saraswathi

                     2.Ahila Sivagami

                     3.Gandhimathi

                     4.Anbumathi                       :Appellants/Petitioners

                                                .vs.
                     1.Jaleel
                       Proprietor,
                       M/s.Best Trading Company,
                       Edamuttam Post,
                       Thirssur.

                     (R1 remained exparte before the Trial Court. Hence
                     notice dispensed with)

                     2.The National Insurance Company Limited,
                       through its Branch Manager,
                       Number Arcade,
                       M.G.Road,
                       Thirssur,
                       Kerala State.

                     3.The Tamil nadu Transport Corporation Limited,
                       through its Managing Director,
                       No.2, Trivandrum Road,
                       Vannarapettai,
                       Tirunelveli.               : Respondents/Respondents


                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of
                     the Motor Vehicles Act against the       judgment and decree made in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                              2

                     M.C.O.P.No.1091 of 2015, dated 30.11.2017, on the file of the
                     Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Special Sub-Court), Tirunelveli.


                                         For Appellants           :Mr.T.S.Selvakumaran

                                         For Respondent-1         :Notice dispensed with

                                         For Respondent-2         :Mr.N.S.Ramakrishna Dass

                                         For Respondent-3         :Mr.R.Rajamohan

                                                     JUDGMENT

*********

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the

appellants/Claimants for enhancement of the award amount passed

in M.c.O.P.No. 1091 of 2015, dated 30.11.2017, on the file of the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Special Sub-Court), Tirunelveli.

2.The appellants/claimants filed the above M.C.O.P alleging

that on 12.06.2015 at about 10.15 p.m, the deceased was travelling

in a bus bearing Registration No. TN 74 N 1552 belong to the third

respondent from Tirunelveli to Pavoorchatram. When the bus was

crossing Veni Puncture Shop in Tenkasi-Tirunelveli Main Road, the

lorry bearing Registration NO. KL 08 AA4164 belong to the first

respondent came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent

manner entered into the right side of the road and hit against the

bus. As a result, the deceased Vellapandian suffered extensive

injuries and died of injuries. He was working as a Senior Sales https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Supervisor in Vasanth and Co., and drawing a sum of Rs.12,000/-

p.m as salary. He used to get incentives at Rs.7500/-p.m. He was a

State Orator in Indian National Congress Party and got Rs.5000/-

p.m by attending meetings. Thus he was earning a sum of Rs.

25,000/-p.m and spent the same for the welfare of the family. After

his death, the claimants, wife and children of the deceased find it

very difficult to lead their normal life. Thus claiming a sum of Rs.

40 lakhs, the claim petition is filed.

3.The second respondent did not dispute the accident and

liability, but the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal

is just and proper and does not require enhancement. The same

position was taken by the third respondent.

4.On considering the oral and documentary evidence the

learned Tribunal awarded compensation as follows:

1.For loss of income - Rs.8,10,000/-

2.For loss of consortium -Rs. 40,000/-

to the first appellant/ wife

3.For funeral expenses -Rs. 15,000/-

                     4.For loss of estate            - Rs. 15,000/-
                                                      -------------------
                                        total        - Rs.8,80,000/-
                                                      -------------------

5.It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

that the Tribunal found that the deceased was working in Vansanth

and Co and fixing the monthly income at Rs.10,000/-p.m., is less

when compared to his age and experience.

6.In response, the learned counsel for the second respondent

submitted that the claimants filed Ex.B4-Wage Slip to show that the

deceased was working in Vasanth and Co and earning a sum of Rs.

12,500/-p.m as salary and Rs.7500/- as incentive. However, the

wage slip was rejected by the Tribunal, as not proved by examining

the concerned witness. Therefore, in the absence of any acceptable

evidence, there is no need to enhance the award amount.

7.From the evidence produced, it is seen that ExB4

Series(three numbers)-wage slips has been produced by the

claimants to show that the deceased was working in Vasanth and

Co. These documents were rejected by the Tribunal for the reason

that it was issued by Vasanth and Co, T.Nagar Branch and not by

Vasanth and Co, Palayamkottai Branch and that no one associated

with Vasanth and Co was examined to prove the wage slip.

However, on the same breadth, the Tribunal also found on the basis

of the evidence of P.W.1, that the deceased was working in Vasanth

and Co for more than 20 years and because of his experience, he

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

was promoted as Manager. When salary certificate is rejected, it is

not known as to why the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the

deceased was working in Vasanth and Co for more than 20 years

and he was promoted as Manager.

8.Be that as it may, the deceased was aged 59 years at the

time of his death. By normal standard, he would have earned not

less than Rs.450/- per day by doing any kind of work including

Coolie work. He would have got employment for 25 days in a

month and he would have easily earned a sum of Rs.11,250/- per

month as monthly income. Therefore this Court can safely conclude

that the deceased would have earned not less than Rs.11,250/-pm

as monthly income. The Tribunal had not given any kind of

consideration for the future prospects. Even for persons working in

unorganized sector, future prospects has to be considered.

Therefore relying on the judgment in the case of Smt.Sarla

Verma .vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported

in 2009(2) TN MAC 1(SC) 10% of Rs.11,250/- is added towards

future prospects. Therefore the monthly income of the deceased

together with future prospects comes to Rs.12,375/-(Rs.11,250/- +

Rs.1125 =12,375/-). Out of this amount, 1/4th amount has to be

deducted towards the personal income of the deceased. 1/4th of the

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

above said amount comes to Rs.3093.75/- rounded off to Rs.

3094/-.Then Rs.3094x3/4 comes to Rs.9281/-.The loss of income

per month is arrived at Rs.9281/-.The deceased was aged 59 years

and the multiplier to be adopted is ‘’9’’. Thus the loss of income is,

Rs.9281/- x 12 x 9 =10,02,348/-.

9.Another submission of the learned counsel for the appellants

is that no compensation was awarded to the claimants 2 to 4

towards loss of filial consortium.This Court also finds from the

award that only the first claimant/wife was awarded a sum of Rs.

40,000/- towards loss of consortium. He pressed into service the

judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Magma General

Insurance Company Limited .vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram

reported in 2018(2) TN MAC 452(SC), for the proposition tht the

dependants are entitled for consortium indivudually at Rs.

40,000/-.Therefore the claimants/appellants 2 to 4 are also

awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- each for loss of filial consortium

totalling to Rs.1,20,000/-. The award under other heads ie.,for

funeral expenses at Rs.15,000/- and for loss of estate estate at Rs.

15,000/-stands confirmed. Thus the award of the Tribunal is

modified as follows:





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


                          S.No         Name of the         Awarded by Awarded by            Remarks
                                         heads             the Tribunal this Court
                      1             For loss of           Rs.               Rs.           enhanced
                                    income                8,10,000/-        10,02,348/-
                      2             Spousal           Rs.40,000/-           Rs.40,000/-   same
                                    consortium to the
                                    first
                                    appellant/wife
                      3             For loss of estate Rs.15,000/-          Rs.15,000/-   same
                      4             For      funeral Rs.15,000/-            Rs.15,000/-   Same
                                    expenses
                      5.            For loss of filial           -----      Rs.           Newly
                                    consortium to the                       1,20,000/-    awarded
                                    appellants 2 to 4                       Rs.40,000/-
                                                                            each)
                      6             Total                 Rs.               Rs.           Enhanced
                                                          8,80,000/-        11,92,348/-

9.In fine, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part and

the award amount is enhanced from Rs.8,80,000/- to Rs.

11,92,348/- with interest at 7.5% p.a from the date of claim

petition till the date of realisation. The second

respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the above

said enhanced award amount with accrued interest and costs, less

the award amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such

deposit being made, the first claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.

5,92,348/- and the claimants 2 to 4 are each entitled to a sum of

Rs.2 lakhs each with proportionate accrued interest and costs and

they are permitted to withdraw the above said amount, less the