Madras High Court
Chamundeeswari vs Balachandar on 13 August, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
CMA.No.2856 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.2856 of 2023
1.Chamundeeswari
2.Muthubharathi
3.Selvi Gnanamani
4.Vignesh
5.Abishek ... Appellants
vs.
1.Balachandar
2.Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
No.78, Danvantri Building, First Floor,
Keezhaveedhi, Chidambaram – 608 001. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award and decree passed in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.341 of 2019 dated 27.09.2022 on the file of the Court of
II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal), Chidambaram.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.2856 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.A.Muthukumar
For R1 : Mr.C.Kavin Kumar
For R2 : Mr.R.Rajesh
JUDGMENT
The appellants, are the claimants in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.341 of
2019 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Additional
District and Sessions Court, Chidambaram and they filed the claim
petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking
compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- for the death of one Mani (husband of the
1st claimant and father of the claimants 2 to 5) in a road accident that
happened on 18.08.2019.
2. The case of the claimants is as follows:
On 18.08.2019, at about 09.00 hours Mani (deceased) was
riding his two-wheeler bearing Registration number TN-31-AK-1939 on
Kattumannarkoil Main Road. When he was nearing Meiyathur bus stand
another two-wheeler bearing Registration number TN-91-6112 hit the two
wheeler driven by Mani, as a result of which Mani fell down and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
sustained injuries. He was immediately rushed to Annamalai Raja
Muthaiah Medical College Hospital. However, he succumbed to injuries
on the same day.
3. According to the claimants, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the motorcycle bearing Registration number TN-91-6112
belonging to the 1st respondent was the cause of the accident and that
since the said vehicle was insured with the 2nd respondent, the New India
Assurance Company Limited, the owner and the insurer are jointly and
severally liable to pay compensation to them.
4. Both the respondents contested the claim petition and the
learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal), Chidambaram, after analysing the evidence on record, fixed the
notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month and awarded a
compensation of Rs.16,92,500/- to the claimants together with interest at
the rate of 7.5% per annum. Since there was a violation of policy
conditions the Tribunal directed the second respondent, the New India
Assurance Company Limited to pay the award amount in the first instance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and then recover the same from the owner of the two-wheeler. Aggrieved
over the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the
appellants/claimants have filed the present appeal under Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicles Act.
5. Heard Mr.A.Muthukumar, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants, Mr.C.Kavin Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the 1st
respondent and Mr.R.Rajesh, learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent.
6. Mr.A.Muthukumar, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants / claimants would contend that the deceased Mani was aged 49
years on the date of the accident and the claimants were depending on his
income. According to the learned counsel for the appellants the deceased
was an agriculturist earning a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- per annum, but the
Tribunal fixed a meagre amount of Rs.10,000/- as monthly income. He
therefore prayed for enhancement of compensation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Per contra Mr.C.Kavin Kumar, learned counsel appearing for
the 1st respondent and Mr.R.Rajesh, learned counsel appearing for the
second respondent contended that the Award passed by the Tribunal is
based on the well laid principles of law which were in vogue at the time
of passing of the order and therefore, the same need not be disturbed at
this stage.
8. It is seen from the records that the deceased was an
agriculturist. He would have easily earned a sum of Rs.15,000/- per
month. Thus the notional monthly income is fixed at Rs.15,000/-. As per
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in National
Insurance Co. vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in 2017 (2)
TNMAC 601 (SC), there will be an addition of 25% towards future
prospects. Since there are five dependents, 1/4th of the deceased's income
is deducted towards his personal expenses. The deceased was aged 49
years on the date of accident and as per the decision rendered in Sarla
Verma and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another
reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121 the proper multiplier is thirteen (13).
Calculation for Loss of Dependency :
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Monthly notional income fixed = Rs.15,000/-
25% towards future prospects = Rs.3,750/-
-------------------
= Rs.18,750/-
1/4th towards personal expenses = Rs.4,688/-
------------------
Less = Rs.14,062/-
multiplier = 13
Thus,the loss of dependency is 14,062 x 12 x 13
= Rs.21,93,672/-
In addition to that, as per the decision rendered by the Constitution Bench
of the Honourable Supreme Court in National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 601,
the claimant is entitled to Rs.2,00,000/- (40,000 x 5), Rs.15,000 and
Rs.15,000/- towards Loss of Consortium, Funeral Expenses and Loss of
Estate respectively. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.24,23,672/- (21,93,672 + (40,000x5) + 15000 +
15000 = 2423672) as shown in the following tabular column.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.No. Head Amount granted
by this court
1. Loss of dependency Rs.21,93,672/-
2. Loss of consortium (40,000 x Rs.2,00,000/-
5 dependents)
3. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.24,23,672/-
The above amount is rounded off to Rs.24,23,750/-.
9. Regarding pay and recovery, since the rider of the two
wheeler viz., 1st respondent did not possess a valid driving license on the
date of the accident the Tribunal directed the 2nd respondent Insurance
Company to pay the award amount at the first instance and recover the
same from the 1st respondent. The owner of the vehicle did not file any
appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal in this regard. Hence, the
order of the Tribunal is confirmed.
10. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
enhanced from Rs.16,92,500/- to Rs.24,23,750/- which would carry
interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11. In the result,
(i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
(ii) The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced
from Rs.16,92,500/- to Rs.24,23,750/-.
(iii) The appellant / claimant is directed to pay court fee for the
enhanced compensation amount, if any, within a period of four weeks
from the date of this order and the Registry is directed to draft the decree
only after receipt of the Court fee.
(iv) The second respondent / The New India Assurance
Company Limited is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation
amount i.e., Rs.24,23,750/- (less the amount if any already deposited)
together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim
petition till the date of deposit within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order to the credit of M.A.C.T.O.P.No.341 of
2019 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Additional
District and Sessions Court, Chidambaram and recover the same from the
1st respondent on the same cause of action.
(v) On such deposit being made, the appellants 1 to 5 /
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
claimants 1 to 5 are at liberty to withdraw the same as per the orders
passed by the Tribunal after following due process of law. The ratio of
apportionment made by the Tribunal shall be kept intact.
13.08.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
dsa
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, II Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Chidambaram.
2. The Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., No.78, Danvantri
Building, First Floor, Keezhaveedhi, Chidambaram – 608 001.
3. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
dsa
13.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
