Madras High Court
Vellaiyappan vs Thangaraj on 18 March, 2024
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
C.M.A.No.2336 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
C.M.A.No.2336 of 2022
1.Vellaiyappan
2.Mani @ Maniammal ...Appellants
Vs
1.Thangaraj
2.Reliance General Insurance
Branch Office,
3rd Floor,
No.408,
Perundurai Road,
Erode-638 011 ... Respondents
Prayer:
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree made in
MCOP.No.13 of 2011 dated 28.03.2016 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal-cum-Special District Court, Salem.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Ramakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan for R2
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2336 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Seeking enhancement of the quantum of the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal vide order dated 28.03.2016 in M.C.O.P.No.13 of 2011, the
appellants have come forward with the present Appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 20.06.2010 at about 10.45
p.m., one Thiru Iruvel, who was the son of the appellants herein, was
returning in a two wheeler bearing Regn.No.TN-30 AF 9228 as a pillion
rider which was ridden by his friend one Mohanraj in a rash and negligent
manner with terrible speed and hit against an electric lamp post laid on the
left side of the road in front of Pillaiyar temple, as a result of which, the
pillion rider sustained multiple fatal injuries all over his body and died. The
appellants herein, being the parents of the deceased Iruvel, filed a petition
claiming Rs.12,00,000/- as compensation.
3. On consideration of both oral and documentary evidence, the
learned Tribunal has awarded the compensation under the following heads,
viz.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.No Particulars Compensation (Rs.)
1 Loss towards dependency 6,48,000
2 Loss of love and affection 20000
3 Funeral expenses 25000
Total 6,93,000
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that
the accident had occurred on 20.06.2010 and at that time, the deceased was
about 23 years and working as a Mason and earning a sum of Rs.12,000/-
per month. However, the Tribunal, in the absence of any evidence
regarding income of the deceased, has fixed his income at Rs.6,000/- per
month notionally, which is very low and hence, he seeks hike in the notional
income. He would further submit that the compensation awarded towards
'love and affection' is also too low and the same is also required to be re-
determined and enhanced and also as no compensation has been awarded
towards 'loss of estate, transportation' the learned counsel seeks to award
just compensation under the said heads.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second respondent would
submit that insofar as the fixation of notional income is concerned, the
Tribunal has fixed the notional income reasonably and hence, he strongly
opposed for the re-fixation of notional income beyond Rs.6000/- p.m. for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the accident occurred in the year 2010. As regards the other heads under
which, the compensation was not awarded by the Tribunal, the learned
counsel would submit that in accordance with the law laid down by the
Apex Court, the compensation may be awarded.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned
counsel for the 2nd respondent and perused the entire materials available on
record.
7. There is no dispute as regards the occurrence of the accident,
fixing the negligence as well as fastening the liability. The only issue is
with regard to determination of quantum of the compensation since the
appellants sought for enhancement of the compensation. In the present
case, the accident had occurred in the year 2010 and at that time, the
deceased was 22 years. In the absence of the income proof, the Tribunal
fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.6000/- per month, but no
future prospects were added. However, the future prospects at 50% were
rightly deducted while applying the multiplier method.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Syed Sadiq vs. United
India Insurance Company, reported in 2014(1) TNMAc 459 (SC), fixed
the notional monthly income even in respect of a Vegetable Vendor at
Rs.6500/-, who sustained injuries in the accident occurred in the year 2008
and now, by applying the multiplier based on cost inflation index, in the
absence of any proof for income, it would come more than a sum of
Rs.13,000/- and hence, this Court is of the view that the notional income of
the deceased fixed at Rs.6000/- is too low and accordingly, this Court feels
it appropriate to fix the notional income of the deceased at a sum of
Rs.8,000/-. Thus, by adding 40% towards future prospects and by applying
multiplier 18 (since the deceased was 22 years at the time of accident) and
by deducting 50% towards personal expenses since he died as a bachelor,
the compensation towards 'loss of dependency income' works out as under:
Rs.11,200/- (Rs.8000-notional income + Rs.3200-40% future
prospects) x1/2x18x12=12,09,600/-
9. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, the
compensation awarded towards 'loss of love and affection' at Rs.20,000/-
granted by the Tribunal is low and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Court, the parents are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards love and
affection and accordingly, the same stands enhanced to Rs.80,000/- from
Rs.20,000/-. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.25000/- towards
funeral expenses, which appears to be on the higher side. The Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of “Pranay Sethi”, has determined the funeral expenses at
Rs.15000/-. Accordingly, the same stands reduced to Rs.15,000/- from
Rs.25,000/-. As regards 'loss of estate', the Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation. Hence, this Court feels it appropriate to grant Rs.15,000/-
towards 'loss of estate' Similarly, no amount has been awarded towards
transportation. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5000/-
towards transportation.
10. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
modified and enhanced as follows:
S.No. Particulars Compensation Compensation
awarded by the awarded by
Tribunal this Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
1 Loss towards dependency 6,48,000/- 12,09,600
2 Love and affection 20,000/- 80000
3 Funeral expenses 25000 15000
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.No. Particulars Compensation Compensation
awarded by the awarded by
Tribunal this Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
4 Loss of estate Nil 15000
5 Transportation Nil 5000
Total 6,93,000/- 13,24,600
11. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at
Rs.6,93,000/- is enhanced to a sum of Rs.13,24,600/-. However, it is to be
noted that the appellants have originally sought for compensation for a sum
of Rs.12,00,000/- only. In the case of “The National Insurance Company
Limited VS Ramavath Papa, W/o. Lalu Naik”, the Andhra Pradesh High
Court has discussed the scope of Order XLI Rule 33 and the power of the
High Court to enhance the award amount in accident cases appropriately. It
has been held that there is no limitation or restriction for awarding just
compensation, and if the Tribunal or Court considers that the claimant is
entitled to more compensation than claimed, it may pass such an award and
enhance the compensation at the appellate stage also. Therefore, in order to
render substantial justice to the claimants/appellants and having regard to
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited supra and considering the
fact that the Tribunal has granted the compensation, which is not just and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
fair, this Court feels it appropriate to enhance the same and awarded
Rs.13,24,600/- accordingly.
12. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
respondent is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.13,24,600/- along with
interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period
of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit
of MCOP.No.13 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-
cum- Special District Court, Salem. Further, the appellants shall pay
necessary Court fee on the enhanced compensation. Thereafter, the Tribunal
is directed to immediately transfer the entire amount to the bank accounts of
the appellants by way of RTGS, within a period of 3 weeks from the date of
deposit and from the date of receipt of the Bank details obtained from the
appellants or application for withdrawal filed by them, whichever is earlier.
No costs.
18.03.2024
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
dn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To:
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-
cum-Special District Court, Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY,J.
m
dn
18.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
