Madras High Court
A.Manoharan vs L.Karthikeyan on 1 October, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R.Hemalatha
CMA.No.1857 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.1857 of 2023
1. A.Manoharan
2. M.Karthick (minor)
3. M.Sindhu (minor) ... Appellants
(Minor appellants 2 and 3 are rep. by their
father & natural guardian Mr.A.Manoharan)
vs.
1. L.Karthikeyan
2. The Bharti AXA General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Metro Plaza, 2nd Floor,
No.162, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 21.12.2020 in
M.C.O.P.3569/2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II
Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Kalai Arasan
For R2 : Mrs.A.Salomi
JUDGMENT
The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.3569/2017 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai. They filed the claim
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, Rule 3 of hte
M.A.C.T. Rules seeking compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- for the death of
one M.Sundari (wife of the first claimant and mother of the claimants 2
and 3) in a road accident that occurred on 06.08.2016.
2. The brief case of the appellants / claimants is as follows :
On 06.08.2016, M.Sundari (deceased) was riding her two-
wheeler bearing Registration number TN-09-BE-7254 on Thoraipakkam -
Adayar road. When she was nearing Seevaram, a speeding lorry bearing
Registration number TN-23-Q-6052, hit the two wheeler, resulting in the
instantaneous death of M.Sundari.
3. According to the claimants, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the lorry bearing Registration number TN-23-Q-6052 was the
cause of the accident and that since the said vehicle was insured with the
second respondent, the Bharti AXA General Insurance Company Limited,
the owner and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay
compensation to them.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. In the Tribunal, the owner of the vehicle remained absent and
was set exparte. The second respondent 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, fastened
negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry bearing Registration
number TN-23-Q-6052. Since the driver of the lorry did not have a valid
driving license on the date of accident, the Tribunal directed the second
respondent, Insurance company to pay compensation of Rs.14,29,400/-
together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of
petition till the date of realisation, in the first instance and then recover the
same from the owner of the lorry (Pay and Recover) vide, its orders dated
21.12.2020.
6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the appellants / claimants have filed the present appeal under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Heard Mr.R.Kalai Arasan, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants and Mrs.A.Salomi, learned counsel for the second respondent.
8. Mr.R.Kalai Arasan, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants/claimants contended that M.Sundari (deceased), aged 32 years
was working as a cashier in a hotel, earning a sum of Rs.12,000/- p.m.
However, the Tribunal had fixed a meagre sum of Rs.7,000/- as her
notional monthly income. He, therefore prayed for enhancing the
compensation.
9. Per contra Mrs.A.Salomi, learned counsel appearing for the
second respondent, contended that the Award passed by the Tribunal is
based on the well laid principles of law which were in vogue at the time of
passing of the order and therefore, the same need not be disturbed at this
stage.
10. According to the claimants, M.Sundari (deceased) aged 32
years, was working as a cashier in a hotel, earning a sum of Rs.12,000/-
per month. In the absence of satisfactory income proof, the Tribunal fixed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the notional monthly income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/-. It is pertinent
to point out that the accident took place in the year 2016 and in the facts
and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that fixing notional
monthly income of the deceased as Rs.12,000/- would meet the ends of
justice. As per the decision of the Supreme Court of India in National
Insurance Co. vs Pranay sethi and others reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC
601, 40% is added towards future prospects of the deceased. Since there
are three dependents, 1/3rd of the deceased's income should be deducted
towards her personal expenses. The proper multiplier to be adopted in the
instant case is 16 as per the decision rendered in Sarla Verma and others
vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC
Calculation :
Notional Income = Rs.12,000/-
after adding 40% Future Prospects = Rs.16,800/-
After 1/3 deduction = Rs.11,200/-
Loss of dependency:
= Rs.11,200/- x 12 x 16
= Rs.21,50,400/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
In addition to that the claimants are entitled to Rs.1,20,000/- (40,000/-x3),
Rs.15,000/- and Rs.15,000/- towards 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.23,00,400/- (21,50,400 + 1,20,000
+ 15,000 + 15,000 = 23,00,400) as shown in the following tabular
column:
S.No. Head Amount granted
by this court
1. Loss of dependency Rs. 21,50,400 /-
2. Loss of consortium Rs.1,20,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- x 3)
3. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.23,00,400/-
11. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
enhanced to Rs.23,00,400/- that would carry interest at the rate of 7.5%
per annum.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
12. In the result,
i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
ii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to
Rs.23,00,400/-.
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 Bharti AXA General Insurance
Company Limited is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation
amount i.e., Rs.23,00,400/- (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 / uploading of this
order to the credit of M.C.O.P.3569/2017 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, II Court of Small Causes, Chennai in the
first instance and then recover the same from the owner of the lorry
(Pay & Recover).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
v. Apportionment :
1st claimant / husband Rs.3,00,400/-
(with interest and costs)
2nd claimant / minor son Rs.10,00,000/-
3rd claimant / minor daughter Rs.10,00,000/-
vi. The share of the minor appellants 2 and 3 is directed to be
deposited in any one of the Nationalised Bank till they attain
majority. The first claimants is at liberty to withdraw his share after
following due process of law.
01.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order / Non speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
vum
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
II Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
vum
01.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
