Madras High Court
Divya vs Vasudevan on 4 November, 2024
Author: J.Nisha Banu
Bench: J.Nisha Banu
C.M.A.No.1346 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.11.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
C.M.A.No.1346 of 2022
1. Divya
W/o.Late Santhakumar
2. Minor.Bharanidharan
S/o.Late Santhakumar
3. Minor.Iniyan
S/o.Late Santhakumar
4. Maariyammal ... Appellants
Vs.
1. Vasudevan
2. M/s.Cholamandalam MG General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
No.9, 1st Floor, Rajaji Road,
Peramanoor, Near Bus Stand, Salem. ... Respondents
Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 166 of Motor
Vehicles Act,1988, challenging the judgment and decree dated 04.04.2022
made in M.C.O.P.No.415 of 2020 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Special District Judge, Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1/8
C.M.A.No.1346 of 2022
For Appellants : Ms.L.Manisha
for Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj
For Respondent
No.1 : Mr.G.Arun Sekaran
For Respondent : Ms.R.Sreevidhya
No.2
-----
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by J. Nisha Banu, J)
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to enhance the
compensation amount made in judgment and decree dated 04.04.2022 made in
M.C.O.P.No.415 of 2020 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal
Special District Judge, Salem.
2. On 09.10.2019 at 5.00 a.m., when the deceased Santhakumar was
riding his two wheeler bearing registration No.TN-34-R-3783 in Covai-Salem
bypass road at Sankari Mettukadai near Sri Balaji Punjabi Dabha from Sankari,
the Mini truck bearing registration No.TN-15-S-6228 was driven by its driver
in a rash and negligent manner in the same direction and hit behind the two
wheeler, due to which, the said Santhakumar died on the spot.
3. It was a case of the claimants that the deceased Santhakumar was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
aged 27 years at the time of accident and was working as Power Loom Weaver
and and he was also a priest in a temple and earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per
month. The claimants/legal representatives of the deceased have filed a claim
petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming a sum of
Rs.40,00,000/- as compensation. . The claim was disputed by the 2nd
respondent/Insurance company.
4. The Tribunal based on the witnesses and on the documents produced
by both sides has fastened the liability on the part of the first respondent
herein/owner of the vehicle, whose vehicle was insured with the 2nd
respondent herein/insurer. The Tribunal has ultimately quantified the
compensation at Rs.13,69,000/-. Being dissatisfied with the quantum arrived at
by the Tribunal, the claimants/appellants are before this Court in this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the
respondents.
6. The dispute is only with regard to the quantum arrived by the
Tribunal. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased
was 27 years old at the time of accident and was working as a power loom
weaver and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month and he was also a priest in a
temple, but the Tribunal has taken the monthly salary of the deceased as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rs.8,000/- only including future prospects. He would further state that the
Tribunal has not taken 40% future prospectus as per the Sarala Verma's case
reported in 2009(2) TANMAC 1. Learned counsel would further state that the
amount awarded under the head of love and affection to the appellants is also
very low and further, no amount was awarded for loss of estate. Therefore, he
would pray to enhance the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal.
7. The learned counsel for the second respondent/Insurance Company
submitted that no proof was produced for the income of the deceased
Santhakumar. He further submitted that the Tribunal has considered the
materials and evidence on record in a proper perspective and has awarded the
compensation, which is just, fair and reasonable and hence, the same does not
require interference in the hands of this Court.
8. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, it is seen from the
materials available on record that the deceased was 27 years at the time of
accident. Though it was averred by the claimants that the deceased worked as a
power loom weaver and a priest in a temple, there was no proof marked before
the Tribunal for the same. However, the Tribunal has taken a sum of Rs.8,000/-
per month as notional income, which in our opinion is meagre and the same
needs to be enhanced. Even if minimum amount of salary is fixed, a sum of
Rs.13,000/- can be taken as a monthly salary. The wife, two minor children
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and the mother are the dependents of the deceased. Taking into consideration,
the age of the deceased, the dependents of the deceased, the year of the
accident and the income of the deceased, We are of the opinion that fixing the
income of the deceased as Rs.13,000/- and adding 40% future prospects would
be fair and proper. Hence, a sum of Rs.13,000/- per month is fixed as notional
income of the deceased. Adding 40% for future prospects, the income of the
deceased is fixed at Rs.18,200/- per month. Since there are 4 dependents,
deducting 1/4th of the amount, it comes to Rs.13650/-. The age of the deceased
is 27 years at the time of accident. Therefore, as per the ratio laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarala Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and another (2009) 6 SCC 121), applying the multiplier of 17, a
sum of Rs.27,84,600/- (Rs.13650x12x17) is awarded for loss of income of the
deceased.
9. As far as the amount awarded under the head of loss of love and
affection is concerned, We are of the opinion that a sum of Rs.80,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal is less amount. Therefore, We fix a sum of
Rs.1,60,000/- i.e., Rs.40,000/- for each claimants towards loss of love and
affection. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount for loss of estate.
Therefore, We fix a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate. Since sufficient
amount is granted for loss of love and affection, no amount is granted under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the head, loss of consortium. We find that the funeral expenses awarded by the
Tribunal is on the higher side i.e, Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, We fix a sum of
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified as follows:
S.No Description Amount Amount awarded Award
awarded by by this Court confirmed or
Tribunal (Rs) enhanced or
(Rs) granted or
reduced
1. Loss of income 6000x12x17 13650x12x17 Enhanced
=12,24,000 =27,84,600
2. Loss of 40000 Nil reduced
consortium
3. Funeral 25,000 15,000 reduced
expenses
4. Loss of love 80000 1,60,000 enhanced
and affection
5. Loss of estate Nil 15,000 Granted
Total 13,69,000/- 29,74,600 Enhanced by
Rs.16,05,600/-
[Rs.29,74,600/-
- Rs.13,69,000]
10.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.13,69,000/- is hereby enhanced to
Rs.29,74,600/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
date of petition till the date of deposit. The 1st appellant/wife is entitled to
Rs.15,74,600/-. The appellants 2 & 3 are entitled to Rs.5,00,000/- each and the
4th appellant is entitled to Rs.4,00,000/-. The appellants are directed to pay the
necessary Court fee if any, on the enhanced award amount. The respondents
are jointly and severally directed to deposit the award amount now determined
by this Court along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited,
if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. On such deposit, the 1st & 4th appellants are permitted to withdraw
the proportionate share amount awarded by this Court along with interest and
costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. Since the 2nd and 3rd
appellants are minors, their proportionate share amount shall be invested in
anyone of the Nationalized Bank until they attain majority and the 1st appellant
being their mother and natural guardian is permitted to withdraw the interest
accrued on the share of the minor appellants once in three months for the
maintenance and welfare of the minors. No costs.
(J.N.B., J.) (R.S.V., J.)
04.11.2024
vsi
To
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special District Judge, Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
J. NISHA BANU, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
vsi
04.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
