Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1600 (MAD)

National Insurance Company Limited v. Meera Sahib

2015-03-24

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2015
JUDGMENT:- 1. The Appeal and Cross Objection are filed against the judgment and decree passed in MCOP No.1159 of 2011 dated 18.07.2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, III Additional District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 13.07.2011 at about 06.30 hours, one Nazeer @ Nazrutheen was riding a bicycle from west to east direction in the Perunthurai – Kanchikoil Road near Thiruvengadampalayam. At that time, a tipper lorry bearing Registration No.TN-34-C-2871 came from behind and hit the said Nazeer in a rash and negligent manner, due to which he was thrown out of the bicycle, sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. The claimants are the parents of the deceased. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,72,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under: HEADS AMOUNT (Rs.) Loss of dependency 3,52,000/- Loss of love and affection 10,000/- Funeral expenses 10,000/- Total 3,72,000/- Challenging the award, the Insurance Company has filed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the claimants have filed the Cross Objection. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant Insurance Company has submitted that Tribunal ought to have taken the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- and it ought to have deducted 50% of the income instead of 1/3rd of the amount, since the deceased was a bachelor. On the other hand, the Tribunal took the monthly income at Rs.4,000/- and deducted 1/3rd from the same towards personal expenses. The learned counsel has also submitted that the Tribunal has erred in adopting the multiplier of 11 and the proper multiplier as per the facts of the case, would be only 5 for arriving at the loss of dependency. Hence, the learned counsel has submitted that the judgment of the Tribunal is not in accordance with law, and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant. 4. The learned counsel for the claimants / cross objectors has submitted that the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier based on the age of the parents, which is not correct. He further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have calculated the loss of dependency only based on the age of the deceased. 4. The learned counsel for the claimants / cross objectors has submitted that the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier based on the age of the parents, which is not correct. He further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have calculated the loss of dependency only based on the age of the deceased. He also submitted that the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- in the absence of any documentary evidence. Therefore, the learned counsel for the claimants /cross objectors has submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal has to be enhanced. 5. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 6. In Kishan Gopal v. Lala, reported in 2013(2) TN MAC 358 (SC), a young boy aged 10 years died in the road accident and the Apex Court fixed the compensation at Rs.5 lakhs with 9% interest. 7. In the present case, the deceased was a bachelor and he was aged 22 years at the time of death. The accident took place in the year 2011. Hence, I am of the view that the monthly income shall be fixed at Rs.6,000/- per month. Even if 50% is deducted towards private expenses and multiplier 11 is used, the loss of income would come to Rs.3,96,000/- (3000 x 12 x 11) and the same can be rounded to Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only). The parents lost their only son at his age of 22. Hence, I am of the view that the parents shall be awarded Rs.75,000/- towards loss of love and affection. Funeral expenses shall be enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. Hence, I am of the view that Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) is the reasonable compensation. 8. Further, applying the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court also, I am of the view that the reasonable compensation is Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only). 9. In the result, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal stands modified to Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition. The shares of the claimants shall be in the same proportion as apportioned by the Tribunal. 10. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Cross Objection are disposed of with the above modification. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 11. The shares of the claimants shall be in the same proportion as apportioned by the Tribunal. 10. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Cross Objection are disposed of with the above modification. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 11. The Tribunal is directed to deposit the modified amount of compensation, less the amount if any already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit being made, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount.