Madras High Court

P. Samatha vs The Managing Director on 29 October, 2024

Author: R.Hemalatha

Bench: R. Hemalatha

CMA.No.277 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.10.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA

C.M.A.No.277 of 2024

P. Samatha .... Appellant

vs.

The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Salem Division.I) Limited,
12, Ramakrishna Road, Salem 7. ... Respondent

PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 31.10.2023 in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3749/2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Special District Court No.II, Cuddalore.

For Appellant : Mrs.A.Subadra

For Respondent : Mr.D. Nitin

1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.277 of 2024

JUDGMENT

The appellant is the claimant in M.A.C.T.O.P.No.3749/2018 on

the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court

No.II, Cuddalore. She filed the claim petition under Section 166(1) of the

Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for the

death of her son in a road accident that occurred on 24.05.2018.

2. The brief case of the appellant / claimant is as follows :

2.1. On 24.05.2018 Manikandan (since deceased) was riding

his two wheeler on Panruti-Cuddalore main road and at about 2.30 p.m. a

speeding bus bearing Registration Number TN-30-N-1147 belonging to

the respondent Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation hit the two

wheeler as a result of which Manikandan fell down and died on the spot.

3. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of

the driver of the bus bearing Registration Number TN-30-N-1147 was

the cause of the accident and therefore the Transport Corporation is liable

to pay compensation to her.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4. The respondent Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation

Limited resisted the claim petition by filing its counter.

5. The Tribunal after analysing the evidence on record fastened

negligence on the part of the driver of the bus bearing Registration

Number TN-30-N-1147 and the deceased in the ratio 90:10 and

directed the respondent Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited

to pay compensation of Rs.8,94,800/- (90% on the total compensation of

Rs.9,94,200/-) to the claimant together with interest at the rate of 7.5%

per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.

6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal and also challenging the contributory negligence fastened on the

part of the deceased, the claimant has filed the present appeal under

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

7. Heard Mrs.A. Subadra, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and Mr. D. Nitin, learned counsel appearing for the respondent

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

8. Mrs.A. Subadra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant

contended that though the FIR and the final report are against the driver of

the bus, the Tribunal was wrong in fastening contributory negligence on

the part of the rider of the two wheeler on the ground that he was not

wearing a helmet at the time of accident. She also contended that the

Tribunal had not awarded just compensation to the claimant.

9. Per contra, Mr. D. Nitin, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent/Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited contended

that the Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record, had concluded

that the deceased also contributed to the accident and awarded just

compensation and therefore the same need not be disturbed in the present

appeal.

Negligence

10. FIR (Ex.P1) was registered against the driver of the bus

bearing Registration Number TN-30-N-1147 belonging to the Tamil

Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited. Jagadish (P.W.2), who is the

eye witness to the occurrence had clearly deposed that the driver of the

bus was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle. The manner of accident

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

also shows that the driver of the bus was rash and negligent in driving his

vehicle. Moreover, there is nothing on record to show that the deceased

also contributed to the accident. Infact the Tribunal had come to the

conclusion that the accident happened only due to the negligence on the

part of the driver of the bus. However, the Tribunal fastened contributory

negligence on the part of the deceased only because he was not wearing a

helmet at the time of accident. This observation of the Tribunal cannot be

sustained because, as already observed, there is nothing on record to show

that the deceased contributed to the accident and hence the same is set

aside.

Quantum

10.1. According to the claimant, Manikandan (deceased) was

aged 24 years on the date of accident and was working as a commission

agent earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month. In the absence of

satisfactory income proof, the Tribunal fixed the notional monthly income

of the deceased as Rs.6,000/-. Considering the year of accident and the

age of the deceased, this Court fixes the notional monthly income of the

deceased as Rs.16,000/-. As per the decision of the Supreme Court of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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 the deceased died as a bachelor, 1/2 is deducted towards

his personal expenses. The proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant

case is 18 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.16,000/-

40% Future Prospects = Rs.22,400/-

After 1/2 deduction = Rs.11,200/-

Loss of dependency

= Rs.11,200/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.24,19,200/-

In addition to that the claimant is entitle to get Rs.40,000/-, Rs.15,000/-

and Rs.15,000/- for '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).

10.2. The enhanced amount under the different heads are

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

detailed hereunder:

                                       S.No.                Head            Amount granted
                                                                           by this court (Rs.)
                                  1.            Loss of dependency                24,19,200/-
                                  2.            Loss of consortium                   40,000/-

                                  3.            Funeral expenses                     15,000/-
                                  4.            Loss of Estate                       15,000/-
                                                Total                             24,89,200/-

This amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the

date of claim petition till the date of deposit.

11. In the result,

i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.

ii. The 10% contributory negligence fastened on the deceased by the

Tribunal is set aside.

iii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to

Rs.24,89,200/-.

iv. The appellant / claimant is 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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis