Madras High Court
Radha @ Radhamani vs C.Vijayarangan on 12 September, 2023
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
1.Radha @ Radhamani
2.Minor Dinesh
3.Minor Swetha
(Minors are rep. by NF/Guardian
Mother Radha @ Radhamani)
4.Sindhamani ... Appellants
Vs.
1.C.Vijayarangan
2.M/s.National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
(Having issuing Branch Office at Third Floor,
Anuradha Complex, Bangalore Main Road, Krishnagiri)
Having Divisional Office at
No.1, TP Hub, L.R.N.Building, 2nd Floor,
L.R.N.Colony, Saradha College,
Main Road, Salem. ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree in M.C.O.P.No.711 of
2018 dated 06.04.2022, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Special District Judge, MCOP Tribunal, Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.R.Navaneetha Krishnan
For Respondents : R1 – Exparte
Ms.N.B.Surekha for R2
JUDGMENT
The claimants have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
2.The appellants/claimants have filed a claim petition stating that on
19.12.2017 at 17.30 hours, when the deceased was riding his two wheeler,
the driver of the offending car which was parked on the road took a sudden
right in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which, the deceased
dashed against the car and sustained fatal injuries.
3.The first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal.
4.The second respondent resisted the claim petition stating that the
accident took place only due to negligence of the deceased that the
deceased did not have valid driving license; that the driver of the offending
car did not have valid fitness certificate; and that in any case, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
compensation claim made by the appellants/claimants is excessive and
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
5.Before the Tribunal, the first appellant was examined herself as
P.W.1 and one Mr.Jagadeesh, eye-witness to the accident was examined as
P.W.2 and marked 19 documents as Exhibits P1 to P19. On the side of the
second respondent, Ms.Geetha was examined as R.W.1 and 1 document was
marked as Exhibit R1.
6.The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record held that the
driver of the offending vehicle did not have a valid fitness certificate,
directed the second respondent to pay the compensation determined by the
Tribunal at the first instance and recover the same from the first respondent.
The Tribunal had determined the compensation amount as Rs.14,05,000/-.
7.The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the
accident took place in the year 2017 and the appellants had established the
fact that the deceased was working as a power loom weaver earning
Rs.20,000/- per month, the Tribunal fixed a meagre notional income of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
Rs.10,000/- per month including future prospects. He therefore prayed for
enhancement of compensation.
8.Since the first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal, the
learned counsel for the appellants made an endorsement that notice to the
first respondent may be dispensed with. Hence notice to the first
respondent is dispensed with.
9.The learned counsel for the second respondent per contra submitted
that in the absence of any evidence either to prove the avocation or income
of the deceased, the Tribunal was right in fixing the notional income of the
deceased at Rs.10,000/- and no interference is called for and prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
10.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as
the second respondent and perused the materials available on record.
11.The only question involved in this appeal is whether the quantum
of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
12.On perusal of records, it is seen that the accident took place in the
year 2017. The appellants have examined P.W.1, the wife of the deceased
to show that he was working as a Power loom weaver and was earning
Rs.20,000/- per month. However, the appellants have not produced any
documents to prove the monthly income earned by the deceased.
13.Considering the year of the accident, the age and avocation of the
deceased, and the number of dependents, this Court is of the view that it
would be just and reasonable to fix the notional income at Rs.12,000/- per
month. Since the deceased is aged 42 years, the appellants would be
entitled to 25% enhancement towards future prospects. Therefore, the
award under the head loss of income has to be Rs.12,000+3,000
(12,000x25%) x12 x14 x 3/4 = Rs.18,90,000/- The award under the head
loss of love and affection is enhanced to Rs.1,20,000/- as the appellants 2 to
4 each would be entitled to Rs.40,000/-. The award of compensation under
the head funeral expenses is reduced to Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal has not
awarded any compensation under the head loss of estate and hence, this
Court is inclined to grant Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. Thus, the
award is modified as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
Amount Amount
S.No. Heads awarded by awarded by Award amount
the Tribunal this Court enhanced or
(in Rs.) (in Rs.) reduced or
confirmed
1 Loss of income 12,60,000/- 18,90,000/- Enhanced
2 Loss of love and affection 80,000/- 1,20,000/- Enhanced
(20,000 x 4) (Rs.40,000 x3)
3 Loss of consortium 40,000/- 40,000/- Confirmed
4 Funeral expenses 25,000/- 15,000/- Reduced
5 Loss of estate - 15,000/- Granted
Total 14,05,000/- 20,80,000/- Enhanced by
by
Rs.6,75,000/-
14.With the above modification, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is
partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.14,05,000/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.20,80,000/- together with interest
at 7.5% per annum (excluding the default period, if any) from the date of
petition till the date of deposit.
15.The second respondent is directed to deposit the award amount,
now determined by this Court, less the amount already deposited, if any,
within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of a receipt of a copy of this
judgment. On such deposit, the first appellant would be entitled to
Rs.10,00,000/- and the fourth appellant would be entitled to Rs.2,80,000/-,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
the first appellant and fourth appellant are permitted to withdraw their share
of the award amount along with proportionate interest and costs, less the
amount if any, already withdrawn. The appellants 2 and 3 each are entitled
to Rs.4,00,000/- and the share of the minors 2nd and 3rd appellants are
directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks till the minor
appellants attain majority. However, the first claimant, mother of the minors
2nd and 3rd appellants is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in
three months. The appellants are directed to pay the necessary Court Fee, if
any, on the enhanced award amount. No costs.
12.09.2023
Index:Yes/No
Speaking Order :Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
pam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
pam
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Special District Judge,
MCOP Tribunal,
Salem.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madras High Court.
C.M.A.No.2043 of 2023
12.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
