Madras High Court
Rengasamy vs S.Sekar on 19 August, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
CMA.No.567 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.567 of 2023
1. Rengasamy
2. Amutha ... Appellants
vs.
1. S.Sekar
2. The Divisional Manager,
M/s.National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.74-A, Paramathy Road,
Namakkal - 637 001. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 09.12.2022 in
M.C.O.P.No.114/2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Judge, Perambalur.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Kamadevan
For R2 : Mr.J.Chandran
R1 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.114/2021 on
the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Perambalur. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for the death
of one Aakash (the son of the claimants) in a road accident which
happened on 08.02.2021.
2. The brief case of the appellants / claimants is as follows :
On 08.02.2021, Aakash (deceased) was riding his two wheeler
bearing registration number TN-46-V-4156 on Veppanthattai - Palaiyur
road. At about 4.30 p.m., a lorry bearing registration number. TN 28 AH
4077 came on the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and
hit the two wheeler driven by the said Aakash (deceased), as a result of
which, he was thrown out and sustained injuries. He was immediately
rushed to Hospital. However, he succumbed to injuries on 13.02.2021.
3. According to the claimants, Aakash was aged 20 years on the
date of accident and was working as a two wheeler mechanic, earning a
sum of Rs.20,000/- per month. They have also contended that the accident
took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry
bearing registration number TN 28 AH 4077 belonging to the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
respondent and that since the said vehicle was insured with the second
respondent the National Insurance Company Limited, Namakkal, the
owner and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation
to him.
4. The first respondent, the owner of the lorry remained absent
before the Tribunal and was set exparte. The second respondent,
Insurance Company resisted the claim petition on all the grounds
available to the insurer under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record,
awarded a compensation of Rs.7,00,002/- to the claimants. The Tribunal
further held that the deceased a 17 years old boy should not have driven a
motorcycle on road and deducted 30% towards contributory negligence
on his part and awarded a sum of Rs.4,90,000/- to the claimants together
with interest @ 7.5% per annum.
6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the appellants / claimants have filed the present appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Heard Mr.S.Kamadevan, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants and Mr.J.Chandran, learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent.
8. According to the claimants, their son was aged 20 years on
the date of accident. In the postmortem certificate (Ex.P7), his age was
mentioned as 19 years. However, Accident Register (Ex.P2), discharge
summary (Ex.P3), Medical Bills (Ex.P4 & Ex.P5) and the death extract
(Ex.P6) show that the age of the deceased was 17 years. The Tribunal had
therefore fixed the age of the victim as 17 years on the date of accident.
Since the victim was not supposed to drive a two wheeler, 30% of the
contributory negligence was fastened on the deceased by the Tribunal. I
do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal with
regard to fixing the age of the deceased and fastening contributory
negligence to the extent of 30%.
9. In so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, in the
absence of income proof, the Tribunal took the notional income of the
deceased as Rs.30,000/- per annum. In the decision in Kishan Gopal &
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Anr vs Lala & Ors reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244, the Supreme Court
fixed the notional annual income of the deceased minor victim at
Rs.30,000/- for the accident that took place in the year 1992. In the
instant case, the accident happened in the year 2021. Therefore fixing the
notional annual income of the minor as Rs.1,00,000/- would meet the
ends of justice. The proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is
18 as per the decision rendered in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.
Calculation :
Notional Annual Income = Rs.1,00,000/-
Applying multiplier 18 = Rs.1,00,000/- X 18
= Rs.18,00,000/-
In addition to that the claimants are entitled to Rs.80,000/- (40,000 X 2),
Rs.1,31,302/-, Rs.8,700, Rs.15,000/- and Rs.15,000/- for Loss of
Consortium, Medical expenses, Transportation, Loss of Estate and
Funeral Expenses respectively as per the decision in National Insurance
Co. vs Pranay sethi and others (cited supra). Thus, the claimants are
entitled to a total compensation of Rs.14,35,000/- (18,00,000 + 80,000 +
15000 + 15000 + 1,31,302 + 8,700 = 20,50,002 (-30% contributory
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
negligence) = Rs.14,35,000/-) as shown in the following tabular column:
S.No. Head Amount granted
by this court
1. Loss of dependency Rs.18,00,000 /-
2. Loss of consortium Rs.80,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- x 2)
3. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
5. Medical expenses Rs.1,31,302/-
6. Transportation charges Rs.8,700/-
Total Rs.20,50,002/-
(-) 30% contributory negligence Rs.14,35,001.4
rounded off to
Rs.14,35,000
10. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
enhanced from Rs.4,90,000/- to Rs.14,35,000/- which would carry interest
at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
11. In the result,
i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
ii. The percentage of contributory negligence i.e., 30% fixed on the
part of the deceased Aakah by the Tribunal, is confirmed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
iii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from
Rs.4,90,000/- to Rs.14,35,000/-.
iv. The appellants / claimants are directed to pay the 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.
v. The second respondent, M/s. National Insurance Company Limited,
Limited, is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount
of Rs.14,35,000/- (less the amount 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.C.O.P.No.114/2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Perambalur.
vi. On such deposit being made, the appellants / claimants 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.
19.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
vum
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
/ Principal District Judge, Perambalur
2. The Divisional Manager,
M/s.National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.74-A, Paramathy Road,
Namakkal - 637 001.
3.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
vum
19.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
