Madras High Court
The Branch Manager vs Rasiya on 1 September, 2023
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
THE HIGH COURT OF JUD ICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
and
C.M.P.No.17602 of 2203
The Branch Manager,
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,
Branch Office,
Siva Complex, II-Floor,
No.22-C, Saradha College Main Road,
Salem District. ...Appellant
Vs.
1.Rasiya
Chinnathambi (died)
2.Elanchezhian
3.S.Khandha Bharathi ...Respondents
Common Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and decree in MCOP.No.320 of
2009 dated 24.06.2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sub-ordinate Judge, Harur.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
For Appellant : Mr.M.J.Vijayaraghavan
For Respondents :Mr.M.Sivakumar for R1 & R2
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)
The Insurance Company is on appeal. Challenge is to the
quantum of compensation awarded at Rs.31,30,000/- for the death of one
Elango in a road accident that occurred on 08.07.2008.
2.According to the claimants, who are the parents and brother of
the deceased, on 08.07.2008, when the deceased was travelling in a Tata
Seira car bearing Registration No.TN-38-E-1456 on the way to Madurai on
the Salem-Karur bye-pass road at around 6 a.m, the driver of the car drove
the car in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bridge. As a
result of the accident, the deceased was trapped inside the car and sustained
grevious injuries. He died on the way to Hospital. Terming negligence on
the part of the driver of the car as a cause of the accident, the claimants
sought for compensation at Rs.50,00,000/-. Though the claimants estimated
the compensation at Rs.1,79,25,000/-, they restricted their claim to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
Rs.50,00,000/-. The quantum was supported, by contending that the
deceased was earning about Rs.30,000/- per month.
3.The Insurance Company resisted the claim contending that the
accident did not occurred in the manner suggested by the claimants. It was
claimed that the vehicle did not have the valid insurance and the negligence
pleaded by the claimants was denied. The Insurance Company contended
that it is not liable to pay the compensation since the driver was not having a
valid driving license,.
4.At trial, the 1st petitioner and one C.K.Ramu were examined as
P.W1 and P.W.2. Exs.P1 to P12 were marked. Neither oral nor
documentary evidence was produced on the side of the Insurance Company.
The owner of the vehicle remained exparte. On a consideration of the
evidence on record, the Tribunal took the monthly income at Rs.30,000/- per
month, deducted 50% towards personal expenses and fixed the monthly loss
of income at Rs.15,000/-. Applying multiplier of 17 as the deceased was
aged 27 years, the Tribunal arrived at the total monetary loss at
Rs.30,60,000/-. It added a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of love and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
affection to the 3rd petitioner and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses.
Thus, the total compensation worked to Rs.31,30,000/-. The Tribunal also
directed payment of interest at 7.5% per annum. Aggrieved, the Insurance
Company is on appeal.
5.We have heard Mr.M.J.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr.M.Sivakumar, learned counsel for the
respondents/claimants.
6.Mr.M.J.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the appellant /
Insurance Company would vehemently contend that there was no basis on
fixation of monthly income at Rs.30,000/-. The accident having occurred in
the year 2008, according to the learned counsel, the fixation of monthly
income at Rs.30,000/- is on the higher side. The finding of the Tribunal on
the question of negligence is not subject matter of challenge in the appeal.
We have considered the evidence on record.
7.It is seen that the deceased was the Managing Director of a
Software Company and the salary certificate that was issued by the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
Company was produced as Ex.P8. In the absence of contra evidence, the
Tribunal believed the document and fixed the monthly income at Rs.30,000/-
. The Tribunal has not added anything towards future prospects and it has
not awarded any amount towards loss of love and affection for the mother.
8.Even assuming that the monthly income, which has been taken
at Rs.30,000/- could be said to be on the higher side, the absence of any
addition for future prospects makes the compensation just and reasonable.
Since the total award amount is reasonable, we do not see any reason to
interfere with the award. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal therefore, fails
and it is accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected
misellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.M.,J.) (R.K.M.,J.)
01.09.2023
kkn
Internet:Yes
Index:No
Speaking
Nuetral Citation :No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and
R.KALAIMATHI, J.
KKN
To:-
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sub-ordinate Court,
Harur.
C.M.A.No.1799 of 2023
and
C.M.P.No.17602 of 2023
01.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
