Madras High Court
The Branch Manager vs Sarkunam on 17 October, 2024
C.M.A.(MD) No.491 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.(MD) No.491 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.6579 of 2024
The Branch Manager,
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,
No.1548, Tenkasi Road,
Rajapalayam,
Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Sarkunam
W/o.Veluchamy
2.Muthuganesan
S/o.Veluchamy
3.Seethalakshmi
D/o.Veluchamy
4.K.S.Muthusingapparaja
S/o.Srirengaraja ... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 to modify the Judgment and Decree dated 13.12.2023
passed in M.C.O.P.No.292 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal/Additional District Court, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar
District.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 7
C.M.A.(MD) No.491 of 2024
For Appellant : Mr.A.Ilango
For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Suresh
For R4 : No appearance
*****
JUDGMENT
The Insurance Company has preferred the instant appeal
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the
first to third respondents.
2. Since the findings on negligence and liability are not under
challenge, the facts leading to the filing of the claim petition are
unnecessary for the disposal of this appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
claimants had not produced any documents to prove the age of the
deceased, and therefore, the Tribunal erred in fixing the age of the
deceased at 60 years and applying the multiplier of '9'; and that the
notional income fixed at Rs.14,000/- per annum is on the higher side in
the absence of any proof of income, and prayed for deduction of
compensation.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned counsel for the first to third respondents/claimants,
per contra, submitted that the notional income was rightly fixed by the
Tribunal, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
in Andal and others Vs. Avinav Kannan and another, reported in
2019(1) TNMAC 54 (DB), considering the cost inflation index; that since
the age of the deceased was 60 years as per his Service Register and even
as per the postmortem report, the multiplier applied by the Tribunal was
right; and that no compensation was awarded towards 'transport expenses'
and the compensation awarded under the other heads is meagre, and
therefore, prayed for enhancement of the compensation.
5. The only point for consideration in the instant appeal is whether
the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable.
6. The age of the deceased was shown as 58 years in the
postmortem report (Ex.P4). However, the extract of the deceased's
Service Register produced on the side of the claimants indicates that the
date of birth of the deceased was 10th June, 1958. Therefore, the Court is
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
of the view that the Tribunal had rightly fixed the age of the deceased at
60 years and applied the multiplier of '9'.
7. As regards the notional income, this Court is of the view that in
the absence of any evidence to prove the pension received by the deceased
or any other source of income, considering the age and avocation of the
deceased and the year of the accident, a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month can
be fixed as notional income of the deceased, 10% has to be added towards
future prospects, and 1/3rd has to be deducted towards 'personal expenses'.
Thus, the compensation under the head 'loss of dependency' would be
Rs.7,92,000/- [10,000 + 10/100 x 12 x 9 x 2/3].
8. The Tribunal had not awarded any compensation towards
'transport expenses'. Therefore, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under the
head 'transport expenses'. The compensation awarded under the other
heads is just and reasonable and is therefore confirmed.
9. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as
follows:
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Sl. Heads Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by confirmed,
the Tribunal this Court reduced,
enhanced or
awarded
1 Loss of dependency Rs.11,08,836/- Rs.7,92,000/- Reduced
2 Funeral Expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Confirmed
3 Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Confirmed
4 Loss of love and
affection to the Rs.1,20,000/- Rs.1,20,000/- Confirmed
claimants
6 Transport Expenses - Rs. 10,000/- Awarded
7 Medical Expenses Rs.2,77,195/- Rs.2,77,195/- Confirmed
Total Rs.15,36,031/- Rs.12,29,195/- Reduced by
Rs.3,06,836/-
10. The appellant is directed to deposit the aforesaid modified
amount of Rs.12,29,195/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum from
the date of the claim petition till the date of realization and costs, after
deducting the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four (4)
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
11. On such deposit, the first to third respondents are permitted to
withdraw the same, as per the apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along
with the interest and costs, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, by
filing suitable application before the Tribunal.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
12. The appellant, Insurance Company, is permitted to withdraw the
excess amount already deposited, if any, together with interest, by filing
suitable application before the Tribunal.
13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.
No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
17.10.2024
Index: Yes/ No
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
JEN
Copy To:
1.The Additional District Judge,
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
JEN
and
17.10.2024
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
