Madras High Court
Murugeswari vs A.Karuppaiyah on 19 August, 2024
Author: R. Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
C.M.A.No.237 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.08.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.237 of 2023
1.Murugeswari
2.Murugalakshmi
3.Arun Pandiyan ... Appellants
Vs.
1.A.Karuppaiyah
2.TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited,
2nd floor, Samson Towers,
No.403 L, Pantheon Road,
Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
3.S.Muthukrishnan
4.The Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Company Limited,
Sivakasi Divisional Office,
77/78, South Car Street,
Sivakasi - 626 123. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the Judgment and Decree dated
21.01.2021 made in M.C.O.P. No.267 of 2016 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perambalur.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.237 of 2023
For Appellants : Ms.Sithi Fathima Samt
for Mr.C.Vidhusan
For Respondents : R1 - Served
Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam
for R2
R3 - Left
Mr.M.Krishnamourthy
for R4
JUDGMENT
The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.267 of 2016 on the
file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perambalur. They filed the
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking
compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- for the death of one Durairaj, (husband of
claimant 1 and father of claimants 2 and 3) in a road accident that took
place on 21.08.2015.
2. The brief case of the appellants / claimants is as follows :
On 21.08.2015, at about 05.30 hrs, Durairaj (deceased) was travelling
in a Hyundai Santro Car bearing registration No.TN 07 AH 0438 with his
wife (Murugeswari) and other relatives on Chennai - Trichy (NH - 45). A
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Swaraj Mazda Tractor bearing registration No.TN 46 Q 2340 was going
ahead of them near Perambalur. The driver of the tractor drove the tractor
rashly and negligently and applied sudden brake without giving proper
signal, as a result of which Durairaj (deceased), the driver of the car, rear
ended the tractor and sustained multiple injuries, resulting in his
instantaneous death.
3. According to the claimants, the accident took place due to the rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the tractor and that since the said
vehicle was insured with the TATA AIG General Insurance Company
Limited, both the owner and the Insurance Company are jointly and
severally liable to pay compensation to them.
4. In the Tribunal, the owner of the car and owner of the tractor
remained absent and were set ex-parte. The second and fourth respondents
(Insurance Companies) resisted the claim petition on all the grounds
available to the insurer under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record, fixed the
negligence on the part of the driver of the Tractor and awarded a sum of
Rs.9,80,000/- towards compensation together with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation to the
claimants. The Tribunal also held that the liability of the owner of the
Tractor and the Insurance Company, namely, TATA AIG General Insurance
Company Limited, is joint and several.
6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal on 21.01.2021, the appellants / claimants have filed the present
appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
7. Heard Ms.Sithi Fathima Samt, representing Mr.C.Vidhusan,
learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam,
learned counsel appearing for the TATA AIG General Insurance Company
Limited, the second respondent and Mr.M.Krishnamourthy, learned counsel
appearing for the New India Assurance Company Limited, the fourth
respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. According to the claimants, the Durairaj (deceased) was running a
Hotel earning a sum of Rs.30,000/-. In the absence of income proof, the
Tribunal fixed the notional monthly income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/-.
9. Since the accident took place in the year 2015, the notional income
of the deceased is fixed at Rs.11,000/- per month. To this sum, 10% is
added towards future prospects of the deceased and 1/3 is deducted towards
his personal expenses as per the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court
of India in National Insurance Co. vs Pranay sethi and others reported in
2017 (2) TNMAC 601. The age of the deceased on the date of the accident
was 50 years and therefore, the proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant
case is 13 as per the decision rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court in
the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and
another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.
Calculation
Notional Income = Rs.11,000/-
Adding 10% Future Prospects = Rs.12,100/-
After 1/3 deduction = Rs.8,066/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Loss of dependency
= Rs.8,066/- x 12 x 13
= Rs.12,58,269/-
In addition to that claimants are entitled for Rs.1,20,000/- (40,000 x 3),
Rs.15,000/- and Rs.15,000/- for loss of consortium, 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.14,08,296/- ( 12,58,269 + 1,20,000 +
15,000 + 15,000) as shown in the following tabular column.
S.No. Heads Amount granted by this
Court in Rs.
1. Loss of Income 12,58,269
2. Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000/- 1,20,000
x 3)
3. Loss of estate 15,000
4. Funeral Expenses 15,000
Total 14,08,296
10. In the result,
i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
ii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from
Rs.9,80,000/- to Rs.14,08,296/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
iii. The appellants / claimants are 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 TATA AIG General Insurance Company
Limited is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount
i.e., Rs.14,08,296/- (less the amount already deposited, if any)
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.267 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Perambalur.
v. 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
vi. It is made clear that the appellants are not entitled for interest for the
period of 91 days of delay in filing this appeal on the amount
enhanced by this Court. No costs.
19.08.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
Neutral Citation Case: Yes / No
ab
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perambalur.
2. The Section officer, Record Section, High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R. HEMALATHA. J.,
ab
19.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
