Madras High Court

Kala vs Meiyalakan on 30 September, 2024

Author: R.Hemalatha

Bench: R. Hemalatha

                                                                            CMA.No.2647 of 2024


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED: 30.09.2024

                                                    CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA

                                              C.M.A.No.2647 of 2024

                     1.Kala

                     2.Minor. Prathiksha

                     3.Minor. Jeeva
                     (2 and 3 minor appellants are represented
                     by their mother and natural guardian Kala)

                     4.Sundarambal

                     5.Thangaraj                                      ... Appellants
                                                        vs.
                     1.Meiyalakan

                     2.Shriram General Insurance Company Limited,
                     VCTV Main Road, Sathy Road,
                     Erode District - 638 003.

                     Having Branch Office at
                     1st Floor, Front Portion,
                     No.5F, Sachin Plaza, Reddiyar Block No.1,
                     Sriram Nagar, Alagapuram Pudur,
                     Salem District - 636 016.                        ... Respondents




                     1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                     CMA.No.2647 of 2024




                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
                     Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 02.01.2024 in
                     M.C.O.P.1489 of 2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
                     Special District Court, Salem.


                                  For Appellants      : Mr.R.Navaneetha Krishnan
                                  For R2              : Ms.R.Sreevidhya


                                                    JUDGMENT

The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.1489 of 2022 on

the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Salem. They filed the

claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking

compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the death of one Gopi, ( husband of

claimant 1 ; father of claimants 2 and 3 ; son of claimants 4 and 5) in a

road accident that took place on 18.07.2022.

2. The brief case of the appellants / claimants is as follows :

On 18.07.2022, Gopi (since deceased) was travelling as a

pillion rider in a two wheeler bearing Registration Number TN-34-R-2776

on Sankari - Padaiveedu Road and at about 03.30 a.m., a speeding another

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

two wheeler bearing Registration Number TN-52-L-7137 belonging to the

first respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the two

wheeler in which Gopi was travelling, causing his instantaneous death.

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

the rider of the two wheeler bearing Registration Number TN-52-L-7137

was the cause of the accident and that since the said vehicle was insured

with the second respondent, the Shriram General Insurance Company

Limited, the owner and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay

compensation to them.

4. In the Tribunal the owner of the two wheeler (first

respondent) remained absent and was set ex parte. The second

respondent, the Shriram General Insurance Company Limited resisted the

claim petition on all the grounds available to the insurer under Section

170 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

5. The Tribunal vide its orders dated 02.01.2024, fastened

negligence on the part of the rider of the two wheeler bearing Registration

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

Number TN-52-L-7137 and also held that the owner of the two wheeler

and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of

Rs.15,15,000/- to the appellants (claimants) 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, the appellants (claimants) have filed the present appeal under

Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

7. Heard Mr.R.Navaneetha Krishnan, learned counsel appearing

for the appellants and Ms.R.Sreevidhya, learned counsel appearing for the

second respondent.

8. Mr.R.Navaneetha Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for

the appellants would contend that the deceased was working as a lorry

driver earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal

fixed the notional monthly income of the deceased only as Rs.10,000/-

including future prospects, which, according to him, is very meagre. He

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

therefore, prayed for enhancement of compensation.

9. Per contra Ms.R.Sreevidhya, learned counsel appearing for

the second respondent contended that the Award passed by the Tribunal is

based on the well laid down 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. In the claim petition, it is contended that the deceased was

aged about 37 years and was a lorry driver earning a sum of Rs.30,000/-

per month. In the absence of satisfactory income proof, the Tribunal fixed

the notional monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- including

future prospects. Considering the age of the victim and the year of the

accident, this Court is of the opinion that fixing notional monthly income

of the deceased at Rs.17,000/- 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 five dependents,

1/4th of the deceased's income should be deducted towards his personal

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

expenses. The proper multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is 15 as

per the decision rendered in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport

Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.

Calculation

Notional Income = Rs.17,000/-

40% Future Prospects = Rs.23,800/-

After 1/4 deduction = Rs.17,850/-

Loss of dependency

= Rs.17,850/- x 12 x 15

= Rs.32,13,000/-

In addition to that the claimants are entitled to Rs.2,20,000/- (44,000 x 5),

Rs.16,500/- and Rs.16,500/- 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). Thus, the claimants are

entitled to a total compensation of Rs.34,66,000/- ( 32,13,000 + 2,20,000

+ 16,500 + 16,500 = 34,66,000) as shown in the following tabular

column.






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



                                       S.No.               Head            Amount granted
                                                                            by this court
                                  1.           Loss of dependency           Rs.32,13,000/-
                                  2.           Loss of consortium           Rs.2,20,000/-
                                               (Rs.44,000/- x 5)
                                  3.           Funeral expenses              Rs.16,500/-
                                  4.           Loss of Estate                Rs.16,500/-
                                  Total                                     Rs.34,66,000/-

11. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced

to Rs.34,66,000/- which would carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per

annum.

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.34,66,000/-.

iii. The appellants / claimants are directed to pay the court fee for the

enhanced compensation amount, if any, within a period of four

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

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 Shriram General Insurance Company

Limited, is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount

i.e., Rs.34,66,000/- (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.1489 of 2022 on the file of the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Salem.

v. Apportionment :

                                   1st claimant / Wife              Rs.8,66,000/-
                                                                    (with interest and costs)
                                   2nd claimant       /    Daughter Rs.10,00,000/-
                                   (Minor)
                                   3rd claimant / Son (Minor)       Rs.10,00,000/-
                                   4th claimant / Mother            Rs.4,00,000/-
                                   5th claimant / Father            Rs.2,00,000/-





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

vi. The compensation amount of the minor claimants 2 and 3 shall be

deposited in any one of the Nationalised Bank till they attain

majority. The claimants 1, 4 and 5 are at liberty to withdraw their

respective shares after following due process of law.

vii.The appellants/claimants are not entitled to claim any interest for

the period of delay of 76 days in filing this appeal.

30.09.2024

Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order mtl

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

1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Salem.

2.Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, VCTV Main Road, Sathy Road, Erode District - 638 003.

Having Branch Office at 1st Floor, Front Portion, No.5F, Sachin Plaza, Reddiyar Block No.1, Sriram Nagar, Alagapuram Pudur, Salem District - 636 016.