Madras High Court
P.Chandramathi vs M.Palanisamy on 5 January, 2024
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.924 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.01.2024
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.924 of 2023
1. P.Chandramathi
2. Minor P.Guna
3. Minor P.Santhosh
4. Minor P.Ramya
Appellants/petitioners 2, 3 and 4 are represented
by their mother who is their natural guardian
... Appellants/Petitioners
Vs.
1. M.Palanisamy
2. New India Assurance Co.Ltd.,
No.17B, Gandhi Road, LIC of India,
North Branch,
Hasthampatty,
Salem 636007.
3. R.Kanthayee ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor
Vehicle Act, 1988 to enhance the compensation amount awarded in the
Fair and Final Order dated 01.11.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.1995/2019
on the file of the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special
District Court), Salem.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.924 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.N.S.Elamugilan
For R1 : Mr.S.Mayilnathan
For R2 : Mr.J.Chandran
For R3 : No appearance
JUDGEMENT
Challenging as against the quantum of compensation awarded by
the Special District Judge, Salem in M.C.O.P.No.1995 of 2019 dated
01.11.2021, the claimants are before this Court.
2. The brief facts are as follows:-
The appellants/petitioners are the wife, son and daughter of
deceased Kutty Paiyan @ Periyannan. On 02.05.2019, the first
appellant's husband was waiting on the left side of Thirumalaigiri road
near water tank for crossing Mottaian street in the two wheeler, the first
respondent's car bearing Registration No. TN 30-M 1537, belonging to
the first respondent and insured with the second respondent/Insurance
Company, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
against the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased was thrown away
and sustained grievous injuries all over his body and head. Immediately,
he was rushed to the Government Hospital, Salem, however, he died on
the way. Thereafter, the appellants have filed a claim petition claiming
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the
deceased was working as Silver Smith and earning not less than
Rs.30,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal has taken the monthly
income of deceased at Rs.12,000/-, which is on the lower side, which
requires to be reconsidered by this Court. Further, the Tribunal has not
awarded any amount under the heads of “loss of estate” and
“transportation” and the same may be awarded. Further, he contented
that the deceased was aged 41 years at the time of accident and had three
minor children, wife and dependent mother. However, no future
prospects has been awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, he prays for
appropriate enhancement in favour of the appellants.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second
respondent/Insurance Company submitted that, the monthly income fixed
by the Tribunal was fair and reasonable. Further, he fairly admitted to re-
determine the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month
and also reasonable percentage of amount towards future prospects.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent and perused the
materials available on record.
6. The fact and manner of the accident is not disputed by the
parties. Therefore, this Court is not dealing into the said aspect. The only
grievance of the appellants is with regard to the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal. It is claimed by the appellants
that though the deceased at the age of 41 years had earned a sum of
Rs.30,000/- as his monthly income, the Tribunal, without considering the
same, had fixed the notional income at Rs.12,000/- per month. There is
no dispute that the deceased had three minor children, wife and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
dependent mother, who has been arrayed as third respondent. Taking into
consideration that the deceased was working as Silver Smith at the time
of accident, and applying the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in
various cases, this Court is of the considered view that the deceased
would have earned not less than Rs.20,000/- per month, and accordingly,
this Court re-determined the notional income of the deceased as
Rs.16,000/- per month. Adding future prospects at 25%, as has been held
by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court, the total income per month
is quantified at Rs.20,000/-. Deducting 1/4th towards the personal
expenses of the deceased, the loss of income is arrived at Rs.15,000/- per
month and the deceased being aged about 41 years at the time of
accident, as evidenced from the records, and adopting the multiplier '14'
as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and
Ors. v. DTC & Ors. reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, the loss of income to
the family is arrived at Rs.15,000/-* 12 *14 = Rs.25,20,000/-, which is
worked out as follows :-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Loss of Income Amount in
Rs.
Notional income (Per month) 16,000
Add: Future Prospects (Rs.16,000 x 25%) 4,000
(Per month)
20,000
Less: Personal expenses (1/4th) (Rs.20,000/- x 5,000
1/4) (Per month)
15,000
Notional income (per annum) (Rs.15,000/- x 1,80,000
12)
Total 25,20,000
7. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of “loss
of love and affection” to the claimants. The amount awarded under the
said head ought to be re-determined as per the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court. Therefore, this Court awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-
each to the appellants 2 to 4 and depending mother towards “love and
affection”. Accordingly, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.1,60,000/-. A sum of Rs.40,000/- has been
granted to the first appellant under the head of "loss of consortium",
which stands confirmed. No amount has been granted under the heads of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
''loss of estate'' and “transportation”. Therefore, this Court is inclined to
award a sum of Rs.15,000/-, and Rs.10,000/- respectively. A sum of
Rs.25,000/-, awarded by the Tribunal under the head of “funeral
expenses”, which is on higher side and the same is reduced to
Rs.15,000/-.
8. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
modified as under :-
Heads Awarded by the Awarded by
Tribunal this Court
(Amount in (Amount in
Rs.) Rs.)
Loss of Income 20,16,000/- 25,20,000/-
(enhanced)
Loss of love and affection 1,00,000 1,60,000/-
(enhanced)
Loss of consortium 40,000/- 40,000/-
Funeral expenses 25,000 15,000/-
(reduced)
Transportation Nil 10,000/-
Loss of estate Nil 15,000/-
Total 15,09,000/- 27,60,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9. The appeal is partly allowed and the impugned Award of the
Tribunal is modified by enhancing the compensation amount from
Rs.15,09,000/- to Rs.27,60,000/-. The second respondent/Insurance
Company is directed to deposit the said amount to the credit of
M.C.O.P.No.1995 of 2019 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs as
awarded by the Tribunal, less the amount if any already deposited, within
a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Upon such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the
entire amount to the respective bank accounts, by way of RTGS, within a
period of three weeks from the deposit or from the date of receipt of the
Bank details obtained from the claimants or application for withdrawal
from the claimant, whichever is earlier. Further, this Court is directed to
deposit a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- to the first claimant, who is the wife of
deceased; a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- to the mother of deceased and a sum of
Rs.4,00,000/- each to the minor appellants 2, 3 and 4. The amount in
respect of the minor shall be deposited in a Nationalized Bank, till they
attain majority, the yearly basis interest can be withdrawn by the first
appellant for the maintenance of the minors. The appellants/claimants are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
directed to pay the necessary Court fee for the enhanced compensation
amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not disburse the enhanced
amount till such time the certified copy showing proof of payment of
Court fee has been produced by the claimants. No costs.
05.01.2024
Index : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
jd
To
1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special District Court,
Salem.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,
jd
05.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
