Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1929 (MAD)

Muthialu Ammal v. Venkatavarada Reddiar

2013-06-06

R.BANUMATHI, T.S.SIVAGNANAM

body2013
JUDGMENT R. Banumathi, J. 1. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation of Rs.2,65,000/- awarded in M.C.O.P.No.479 of 1992 (21.09.1994) on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Additional District Judge), Pondicherry for the death of Chandrasekaran in the road traffic accident on 16.7.1992, the Claimants have preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts are that on 16.7.1992, deceased Chandrasekaran and several other villagers of Thiruvandarkoil assembled for the purpose of making request to the crew of the bus plying enroute Thiruvandarkoil to make a stop at the place called "Rice Mill Stop" for helping the villagers. While the villagers have assembled on 16.7.1992, the bus bearing registration No.PY-01 7337 reached the village at about 19.30 hours. The villagers stopped the bus and some of them were talking to the crew of the bus. As arguments developed, the crew and the persons who got into the bus were in an agitated mood. While being so, the driver of the bus suddenly in a rash and negligent manner moved the bus and hit against the deceased Chandrasekaran, who was standing on the side of the road. Regarding the accident, a criminal case was registered against the bus driver in Crime No.79 of 1992 under Section 304(A) I.P.C. of Thirubuvanai Police Station. At the time of accident, deceased was working as Supervisor in Co-operative Spinning Mills, Thiruvandarkoil, Pondicherry and was earning Rs.2000/- per month. Alleging that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and that the family has lost the support of the bread winner, Claimants who are wife, son and mother have filed Claim Petition claiming compensation of Rs.21,20,000/-. 3. Resisting the Claim Petition, Appellant-Insurance Company filed counter contending that on the date of accident the villagers entered into the bus and quarrelled with the conductor and driver and tried to attack the driver. The driver found no other choice except starting the bus to save his life and the passengers inside the bus and that the accident occurred only due to the riot by the villagers across the road against the bus. It was averred that the death was due to mistake on the part of the deceased only. Appellant-Insurance Company also denied the age, occupation, monthly income of the deceased and that the compensation claimed is excessive. 4. Before the Tribunal, 1st Claimant-Muthaluammal examined herself at P.W.1. Eyewitness Venkatakrishnan was examined as P.W.2. It was averred that the death was due to mistake on the part of the deceased only. Appellant-Insurance Company also denied the age, occupation, monthly income of the deceased and that the compensation claimed is excessive. 4. Before the Tribunal, 1st Claimant-Muthaluammal examined herself at P.W.1. Eyewitness Venkatakrishnan was examined as P.W.2. Balakrishna Reddiar, who lodged Ex.A1-complaint was examined as P.W.3. Exs.A1 to A12 were marked. No oral and documentary evidence was adduced on the side of Appellant-Insurance Company. 5. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, Tribunal held that the accident was due to rashness and negligence of the bus driver in suddenly moving the bus. Finding that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, Tribunal held that the Appellant-Insurance Company being the insurer of the bus bearing registration No. PY-01 7337 is liable to pay compensation to the Claimants. Based on Exs.A9 and A12, Tribunal had taken the monthly income of the deceased atRs.1969.57. Deducting Rs.170/-towards personal expenses, Tribunal calculated the contribution to the family at Rs.1800/- per month and Rs.21,600/- per annum. Adopting multiplier "12", Tribunal calculated the "loss of dependency" at Rs.2,59,200/-. Adding conventional damages at Rs.5,800/-, Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.2,65,000/-. 6. In her evidence, P.W.1-Muthaluammal stated that deceased was aged 35 years and her husband was working as Supervisor in Spinning Mills at Pondicherry and thereby was earning Rs.2000/- per month. Ex.A9 is the pay slip of deceased, as per which the net earning of the deceased was Rs.1969.57 per month. Ex.A9-pay slip containing details of the salary drawn by the deceased. Ex.A12 is the salary certificate issued by The Pondicherry Co-operative Spinning Mills Limited, as per which the deceased was getting salary of Rs.1,993.75 per month. Tribunal had taken the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.1969.57 and after deducting Rs.170/-for personal expenses, taken the contribution to the family at Rs.1800/- per month i.e. Rs.21,600/- per annum. 7. Deceased was employed as Supervisor in The Pondicherry Co-operative Spinning Mills Limited and thus had permanent job. As per Sarla Verma's case [(2009) 6 SCC 121], if the deceased had permanent job and is below 40 years, 50% addition has to be given towards future prospects. Since the deceased had permanent job and was aged 37 years, as per the ratio laid down in Sarla Verma's case, 50% addition to be made towards future prospects. 8. As per Sarla Verma's case [(2009) 6 SCC 121], if the deceased had permanent job and is below 40 years, 50% addition has to be given towards future prospects. Since the deceased had permanent job and was aged 37 years, as per the ratio laid down in Sarla Verma's case, 50% addition to be made towards future prospects. 8. In her evidence, P.W.1 stated that the family owned three acres of agricultural lands and the deceased was also contributing his physical labour in the agriculture and because of the death of deceased, they will not be in a position to carry on the agricultural operations and earn agricultural income. Deceased was also said to be getting annual income of Rs.20,000/-from agriculture. To prove that the family owned agricultural lands and that partition effected between the family members of deceased Chandrasekaran, Claimants have produced Ex.A10-registration copy of partition deed (09.07.1980), as per which the "C" schedule thereon was allotted to the share of deceased. 9. In the case of death of agriculturist, even after the death of deceased, the lands continued to remain with the family. In New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Charlie and Another ( AIR 2005 SC 2157 ), the Supreme Court held that normal rule of deprivation of income will not arise in case of death of agriculturist. At the most, Claimants would be entitled only nominal charges for the assistance rendered by the deceased towards maintaining the lands and marketing the agricultural products. Loss could be determined only based on the managerial assistance and supervision which the deceased was rendering towards agriculture. Keeping in view the extent of agricultural lands and also the fact that the deceased was a full time Supervisor in The Pondicherry Co-operative Spinning Mills Limited, an amount of Rs.1500/- per month is taken as loss towards supervision and managerial assistance which the deceased was rendering to the family. Thus the total income of the deceased is taken at Rs.4,500/-(Rs.2000/- as salary plus Rs.1000/- as future prospects plus Rs.1500/- as loss towards supervision over agriculture). Deducting one-third i.e. Rs.1500/-for personal expenses, the loss of contribution to the family is calculated at Rs.3000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 10. Deceased was aged 37 years at the time of accident. As per Second Schedule to M.V. Act, the proper multiplier to be adopted is "16". Deducting one-third i.e. Rs.1500/-for personal expenses, the loss of contribution to the family is calculated at Rs.3000/- per month and Rs.36,000/- per annum. 10. Deceased was aged 37 years at the time of accident. As per Second Schedule to M.V. Act, the proper multiplier to be adopted is "16". Adopting multiplier "16", the total "loss of dependency" is calculated at Rs.5,76,000/- (Rs.36,000/- x 16 = Rs.5,76,000/-). 11. Insofar as conventional damages, even though Tribunal has observed that 1st Claimant has lost her husband at her young age, Tribunal has awarded very meagre amount of Rs.5,800/- towards loss of consortium. 1st Claimant aged 28 years at the time of accident has lost her husband at her young age and having regard to her age, the compensation of Rs.5,800/- awarded by the Tribunal towards "loss of consortium" is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards "loss of love affection". 2nd Claimant-minor son of the deceased has lost love and affection of his father at very young age of 6 years. Therefore, compensation of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards "loss of love and affection". For funeral expenses, a sum of Rs.5,000/-is awarded. Thus the compensation of Rs.2,65,000/-awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.6,41,000/- as under:- Loss of dependency ... Rs.5,76,000.00 (Rs.36,000 x 16) Loss of consortium ... Rs. 10,000.00 Loss of love and affection ... Rs. 50,000.00 Funeral expenses ... Rs. 5,000.00 Total ... Rs.6,41,000.00 The enhanced compensation of Rs.3,76,000/- (Rs.6,41,000 – 2,65,000/-) is payable with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the Claim Petition. Pending appeal, 3rd Claimant mother of the deceased died and Claimants 1 and 2 were recorded as legal heirs of deceased 3rd Claimant. Therefore, the enhanced compensation of Rs.3,76,000/- is to be apportioned amongst the Claimants 1 and 2 equally. The compensation amount already awarded if any lying in deposit payable to the mother of the deceased (3rd Claimant), the Claimants 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw the same. 12. In the result, the compensation of Rs.2,65,000/- awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.479 of 1992 (21.09.1994) on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Additional District Judge), Pondicherry is enhanced to Rs.6,41,000/- and the appeal is partly allowed. It was stated before us that Appellant-Insurance Company has deposited the entire compensation amount along with accrued interest awarded by the Tribunal. It was stated before us that Appellant-Insurance Company has deposited the entire compensation amount along with accrued interest awarded by the Tribunal. Out of which Claimants are said to have withdrawn portion of the amount. Claimants 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw the remaining balance amount if any along with proportionate accrued interest immediately after the receipt of copy of this judgment. Appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.3,76,000/- along with accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of Petition till the date of deposit within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the Claimants 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw the same along with proportionate accrued interest equally. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed. No costs.