Madras High Court
Manvizhi vs The Managing Director on 30 October, 2024
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
1. Manvizhi
2. V.Balu ... Appellants in C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014
1. B.Senthil Vadivu
2. S.Balamurugan ... Appellants in C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014
Vs.
The Managing Director,
MTC, Anna Salai,
Chennai 2. ... Respondent in both the appeals
Prayer in C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and
decree dated 06.03.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (II Addl. District Court), Poonamallee.
Prayer in C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed
under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and
decree dated 06.03.2014 made in M.C.O.P.No.629 of 2011, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (II Addl. District Court), Poonamallee.
1/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
Appearance in both Appeals:
For Appellants : C/V filed by M/S.M.N.Mohanraj,
Mr.M.Lokesh, MA.P.Thangavel,
B.Devagi Thangavel
For Respondent : Mr.Vinodh Raj
COMMON JUDGEMENT
Since the issue involved in both the appeals are one and the same,
with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, both the appeals were
heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The facts in brief are as follows :-
On 19/20.05.2011 at about 00.30 hours, when the deceased persons
in M.C.O.P.Nos.628 and 629 of 2011 were travelling in an Yamaha motor cycle
bearing Regn.No.TN 57 AZ 5353 as rider and pillion rider, at that time, a bus
belonging to the respondent/Transport Corporation driven by its driver in a rash
and negligent manner and dashed the motor cycle driven by the deceased
persons, due to which they sustained fatal injuries and died. Seeking
compensation for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- the legal heirs of the deceased
persons have filed respective claim petitions.
2/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
3. Before the Tribunal the claimants examined P.W.1 to P.W.4 and
marked Exs.P.1 to P.16. On the side of respondents they examined R.W.1 and
R.W.2 and no documents were marked and no witnesses were examined on
their behalf. Upon perusing the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal
fastened 20% negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle and 80%
negligence on the part of the driver of the respondent/Transport Corporation.
Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the
dependants of the deceased persons are before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants in C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014
submits that the Tribunal awarded the lumpsum compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-
as loss of income, since the deceased was a Bachelor and also a Student, he was
having a potential choice for pursuing higher education, thereby he would have
earned more income. In this regard he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala Vs.M.Malathi and Anr. Reported in
2014 11 SCC 178. He also relied upon the decision of this Court in
C.M.A.(MD).No.96 of 2019 vide judgment dated 30.03.2021 in the case of
Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Company Vs.V.Raha and ors.
3/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants in
C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014 submits that the Tribunal erred in fixing the
negligence at 80% : 20%. He further submits that the respondent Corporation
have not proved properly, the possession or smell of alcohol on the rider of the
motor cycle. Further there is no solid evidence that the rider of the motor cycle
having the smell of alcohol. He further submits that there is a conflicting
evidence on the side of respondents i.e., between R.W.1 Driver and R.W.2
Conductor of the Corporation bus. When there is a conflicting evidence, the
Tribunal ought not to have believed the evidence of the respondent and fixed
the negligence. Hence the award of the Tribunal should be interfered with.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent / Corporation submits that
the deceased persons have been travelling in the motor cycle after consuming
alcohol and they have completely lost their control and had driven the vehicle
in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the respondent's bus. Therefore, the
respondent / corporation is not liable to pay the compensation to the
dependants. Hence, the appeals are liable to be dismissed.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants in respective appeals
4/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
and the learned counsel for the respondent / corporation and perused the
materials placed on record.
8. In the light of the aforesaid narration of events and the legal
contentions, this Court is required to examine whether the appellants are
entitled to enhancement of compensation or not. Insofar as the negligence fixed
on the part of the rider of the motor cycle, it is seen from Ex.P9, the post-
mortem certificate of the deceased Ramkumar that 500 milligrams of semi
digested solid food grains with the smell of alcohol was present in the stomach
of the deceased Ramkumar. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with
the negligence fixed on the part of the rider of the motor cycle.
9. In the case of pillion rider in M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011, the
Tribunal has awarded a lumpsum amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, however, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala (supra) has considered the
case of a student in an unequivocal terms and held that the monthly notional
income has to be determined as a reasonable compensation under the head loss
of income instead of awarding lumpsum amount. In the case of Iffco-Tokio
(supra) this Court after relying upon the decision of Division Bench of this
5/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
Court in S.Chinnaraj and others Vs.Suresh Kumar and another reported in 2019
(1) TNMAC 189 (DB) fixed the monthly income of the deceased at
Rs.10,000/-. In the present case the deceased was aged 18 years and was a
student at the time of accident, about to join SRM Polytechnic to persue his
higher education. While granting compensation in the case of a student /
bachelor several factors should be taken into consideration including education
and the nature of job. The question as to the methodology required to be
applied for determination of compensation as regards prospective loss of future
earnings, however as far as possible should be based on certain principles. A
person may have a bright future prospect; he might have chances of an
immediate pay revision, whereas in another situation the nature of employment
was such that he might not have continued in service. It is therefore difficult for
any Court to lay down rigid tests which should be applied in all situations.
Hence, in some cases it has been suggested that some sort of hypotheses or
guesswork may be inevitable. Therefore following the ratio laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala (Supra) and also the judgment
of this Court in the case of Iffco-Tokio (supra), this Court is inclined to fix
monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-. Accordingly, the monthly
income of the deceased is fixed as Rs.10,000/- and after adding 40% towards
6/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
future prospects, the same would arrive at Rs.14,000/- (Rs.10,000 + Rs.4,000).
Since the deceased died as a bachelor, 50% has to be deducted towards
personal expenses. After deducting 50% towards personal expenses, the
monthly income of the deceased would be at Rs.7,000/- (Rs.14,000 – 50% of
Rs.14,000) and as per the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma
and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in 2009 (2)
TN MAC 1 (SC), the right multiplier to be adopted is '18' and hence, the loss of
income would be at Rs.15,12,000/- (Rs.7,000 x 12 x 18).
10. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the claimants in
M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011 under the head loss of love and affection, which is on
the lower side and the same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.40,000/- to each
claimants. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head funeral
expenses which is also on the lower side and the same is enhanced to a sum of
Rs.15,000/- under the said head. The other heads awarded by the Tribunal are
just and reasonable and the same does not require any interference. This Court
finds that the Tribunal has failed to award any amount towards loss of estate,
hence, this Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.15,000/- under the said head.
7/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
11. In the above circumstances, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011 is modified as under :-
Heads Awarded by Awarded by
the Tribunal this Court
(Amount in (Amount in
Rs.) Rs.)
Loss of Income 5,00,000/- 15,12,000/-
(enhanced)
Loss of love and affection 20,000/- 80,000/-
(enhanced)
Medical expenses 6,22,430/- 6,22,430/-
(confirmed)
Funeral expenses 5,000/- 15,000/-
(enhanced)
Transport 9,720/- 9,720/-
(confirmed)
Loss of estate - 15,000/-
(awarded)
Total 11,57,150/- 22,54,150/-
Less 20% contributory 2,31,430 4,50,830/-
negligence on the part of the
rider of the motorcycle
Total 9,25,720/- 18,03,320/-
12. The appeal in C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014 is partly allowed and the
impugned Award of the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011 is modified by
enhancing the compensation amount to Rs.18,03,320/-. The
respondent/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the said amount to the
8/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
credit of M.C.O.P.No.628 of 2011 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs as
awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already deposited, within a
period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The
said award amount shall be apportioned amongst the appellants in
C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014 as per the Award of the Tribunal.
13. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer
the award amount directly to the bank account of the appellants in
C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014 through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter
upon production of proof with regard to payment of Court fee on the enhanced
compensation. The appellants in C.M.A.No.3035 of 2014 is directed to pay
necessary additional Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount and
thereafter.
14. In the case of the rider of the motor cycle in M.C.O.P.No.629 of
2011, with regard to the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal has taken the
monthly income of the deceased only as Rs.10,840/- instead of Rs.12,898/-
which is the salary of the deceased as per Ex.P.12. Hence, this Court is inclined
9/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
to fix a sum of Rs.12,898/- as the notional income of the deceased Ramkumar
and after adding 40% towards future prospects, the same would arrive at
Rs.18,057/- (Rs.12,898 + Rs.5,159). Since the deceased died as a bachelor,
50% has to be deducted towards personal expenses. After deducting 50%
towards personal expenses, the monthly income of the deceased would be at
Rs.9,028/- (Rs.18,057 – 50% of Rs.18,057) and as per the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
and another reported in 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC), the right multiplier to be
adopted is '18' and hence, the loss of income would be at Rs.19,50,048/-
(Rs.9,028 x 12 x 18).
15. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- to the claimants in
M.C.O.P.No.629 of 2011 under the head loss of love and affection, which is on
the lower side and the same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.40,000/- to each
claimants. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- under the head funeral
expenses which is also on the lower side and the same is enhanced to a sum of
Rs.15,000/- under the said head. The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of
Rs.5,000/- under the head transport expenses which is on the lower side and the
same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.10,000/- under the said head. This Court finds
10/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
that the Tribunal has failed to award any amount towards loss of estate, hence,
this Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.15,000/- under the said head.
16. In the above circumstances, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.629 of 2011 is modified as under :-
Heads Awarded by Awarded by
the Tribunal this Court
(Amount in (Amount in
Rs.) Rs.)
Loss of Income 13,87,584/- 19,50,048/-
(enhanced)
Loss of love and affection 20,000/- 80,000/-
(enhanced)
Funeral expenses 5,000/- 15,000/-
(enhanced)
Transport expenses 5,000/- 10,000/-
(enhanced)
Loss of estate - 15,000/-
(awarded)
Total 14,17,584/- 20,70,048/-
Less 20% contributory 2,83,517/- 4,14,009/-
negligence on the part of the
rider of the motorcycle
Total 11,34,067/- 16,56,038/-
17. The appeal in C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014 is partly allowed and the
impugned Award of the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.629 of 2011 is modified by
11/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
enhancing the compensation amount to Rs.16,56,038/-. The
respondent/Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the said amount to the
credit of M.C.O.P.No.629 of 2011 along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs as
awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already deposited, within a
period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The
said award amount shall be apportioned amongst the appellants in
C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014 as per the Award of the Tribunal.
18. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer
the award amount directly to the bank account of the appellants in
C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014 through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter
upon production of proof with regard to payment of Court fee on the enhanced
compensation. The appellants in C.M.A.No.3036 of 2014 is directed to pay
necessary additional Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount and
thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs in the present appeal.
30.10.2024
rap
Speaking Order : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
12/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
To
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
II Additional District Court, Poonamallee.
2. The Section Officer
V.R. Section, High Court, Madras.
13/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
rap
C.M.A.Nos.3035 & 3036 of 2014
30.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
