Madras High Court
Sindhu vs N.Moorthy on 9 September, 2024
Author: R.Hemalatha
Bench: R. Hemalatha
CMA.No.1301 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.M.A.No.1301 of 2024
1.Sindhu
2.Minor. Sharvesh
3.Minor. Prithisha
(2 and 3 minor appellants are represented
by their mother and natural guardian Sindhu)
4.Navaneedham
5.Ragavel ... Appellants
vs.
1.N.Moorthy
2.The Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited,
Motor III Party Claims Office,
No.4, Lady Desika Road, Mookambika Complex,
Mylapore, Chennai - 4. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Award dated 07.08.2023 in
M.C.O.P.936 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Court No.II, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CMA.No.1301 of 2024
For Appellants : Ms.G.Anitha
for Mr.K.Sivakumar
For R2 : Ms.R.Sreevidhya
JUDGMENT
The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P.936 of 2021 on the
file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Small Causes Court,
Chennai. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.49,00,000/- for the death
of one Karthik, ( husband of the first claimant, father of claimants 2 and 3
and son of claimants 4 and 5) in a road accident that took place on
25.05.2018.
2. The brief case of the appellants / claimants is as follows :
On 25.05.2018, Karthik (since deceased) was driving a Tata
Ace vehicle bearing Registration Number TN-73-C-7107 on Banavaram –
Sholinghur Road. When he was nearing Ramapuram bus stop, a paddy
harvesting machine bearing Registration Number TN-25-W-3030 hit the
Tata Ace vehicle driven by Karthik (deceased), as a result of which, he
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
sustained injuries all over his body. He was immediately rushed to the
Hospital. However, he succumbed to injuries on the same day.
3. According to the claimants, the rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the paddy harvesting machine bearing Registration Number
TN-25-W-3030 was the cause of the accident and that since the said
vehicle was insured with the second respondent, the Shri Ram General
Insurance Company Limited, the owner of the vehicle and the insurer are
jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to them.
4. In the Tribunal the owner of the vehicle (paddy harvesting
machine) remained absent and was set ex parte. The second
respondent, the Shri Ram 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 after analysing the evidence on record, fastened
negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle (paddy harvesting
machine) and awarded compensation of Rs.26,11,400/- to the appellants /
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
claimants together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of realisation, vide its orders dated
07.08.2023.
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 Ms.G.Anitha, learned counsel appearing for the
appellants and Ms.R.Sreevidhya, learned counsel appearing for the
second respondent.
8. Ms.G.Anitha, learned counsel appearing for the appellants
would contend that the deceased was a driver by profession earning a sum
of Rs.30,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal fixed the notional
monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,500/-, which, according to her,
is very meagre. She therefore, prayed for enhancement of the notional
income of the deceased.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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 24 years and was a driver by profession earning a sum of
Rs.30,000/- per month. In the absence of income proof, the Tribunal
fixed the notional monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,500/-.
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.15,000/- 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 expenses. The
deceased was aged 24 years on the date of accident and the proper
multiplier to be adopted in the instant case is 18 as per the decision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
rendered in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.
Calculation
Notional Income = Rs.15,000/-
40% Future Prospects = Rs.21,000/-
Loss of dependency
= Rs.34,02,000/-
In addition to that the claimants are entitled to Rs.2,00,000/- (40,000 x 5),
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). Thus, the claimants are
entitled to a total compensation of Rs.36,32,000/- ( 34,02,000 + 2,00,000
+ 15,000 + 15,000= 36,32,000) as shown in the following tabular column.
S.No. Head Amount granted
by this court
1. Loss of dependency Rs.34,02,000/-
2. Loss of consortium Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- x 5)
3. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.No. Head Amount granted
by this court
4. Loss of Estate Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.36,32,000/-
11. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced
from Rs.26,11,400/- to Rs.36,32,000/- 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 from
Rs.26,11,400/- to Rs.36,32,000/-.
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 Shri Ram General Insurance Company
Limited, is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount
i.e., Rs.36,32,000/- (less the amount already deposited) together
with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petition till the date of deposit within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order to the credit of
M.C.O.P.936 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.II, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
v. Apportionment :
1st claimant / Wife Rs.10,32,000/-
(with interest and costs)
2nd claimant / Son (Minor) Rs.10,00,000/-
3rd claimant / Daughter Rs.12,00,000/-
(Minor)
4th claimant / Mother Rs.3,00,000/-
5th claimant / Father Rs.1,00,000/-
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.
09.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
mtl
To
1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Special Sub Court No.II, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The Shri Ram General Insurance Company Limited,
Motor III Party Claims Office,
No.4, Lady Desika Road, Mookambika Complex,
Mylapore, Chennai - 4.
3.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.HEMALATHA, J.
mtl
09.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
