Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 4104 (MAD)

Chithakkal v. Maria Thanga Pushpam

2016-12-05

N.KIRUBAKARAN

body2016
JUDGMENT : N. Kirubakaran, J. 1. The Claimants are aggrieved over the compensation of Rs. 3,19,800/- for the death of the deceased, who is the husband of the first appellant, who died in the accident occurred on 11.05.2005, when he was carrying fish in the mini lorry, which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, leading to capsizing and resulting in the death of the deceased. Therefore, the claimants preferred the claim petition. 2. On contest, the Tribunal found that the vehicle in question was driven rash and negligently and hence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,19,800/-. The Insurance Company has not preferred any appeal regarding negligence and liability and therefore the question posed before this Court is only with regard to quantum of compensation. 3. Mr. T. Selvakumaran, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants would submit that only a sum of Rs. 2,700/- p.m. was fixed as monthly income of the deceased, who is a fisherman, selling fishes during the year 2005, which is on the lower side. Further, one third deduction is also not sustainable. Further, he would submit that only a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was awarded towards love and affection to all the dependants including the wife. Hence, the learned counsel seeks for enhancement of the same. However, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company opposed the same. 4. A perusal of the records would reveal that the accident had occurred in the year 2005. At the time of accident, though the deceased was aged about 50 years, as proved by Ex.P5-Post-mortem Certificate, the deceased was aged about 45 years. The Honourable Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Smt. Kalpana and Others, 2007 (1) TNMAC 1, determined a sum of Rs. 4,500/- p.m. as the monthly income for a driver who died in the accident which occurred on 07.06.99, whereas, in this case, the accident had occurred in the year 2005 and therefore, the determination of monthly income at Rs. 2,700/- p.m. is on the lower side and the same is enhanced to Rs. 4,500/- p.m. 5. 4,500/- p.m. as the monthly income for a driver who died in the accident which occurred on 07.06.99, whereas, in this case, the accident had occurred in the year 2005 and therefore, the determination of monthly income at Rs. 2,700/- p.m. is on the lower side and the same is enhanced to Rs. 4,500/- p.m. 5. The Tribunal only deducted one third amount towards personal expenses of the deceased, whereas, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC) held that if the size of the family exceeds three persons, then one fourth is required to be deducted. In this case, the total number of dependants are five in numbers and therefore one fourth amount is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and monthly income after deduction of one fourth amount comes to Rs. 4500/- (-) Rs. 1,125/- = Rs. 3,375/- and the annual income would be Rs. 4500 x 12 x 13 = Rs. 5,26,500/- taken into consideration multiplier of 13' as per Sarla Verma's case. Only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was awarded for loss of consortium to the wife. The wife is always a person who is most aggrieved and it has to be necessarily consoled and compensated appropriately. As per the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh and Others vs. Rajbir Singh and Others, 2013 (2) TN MAC 55 (SC), a sum of Rs. 1 lakh has to be awarded for loss of consortium. Therefore the sum of Rs. 10,000/- is enhanced to Rs. 1 lakh towards consortium. Similarly, all the children were minors, aged about 16, 13 and 14 years and only a sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded towards loss of love and affection and each child is awarded Rs. 50,000/- and the mother of the deceased is awarded with a sum of Rs. 50,000/-towards loss of consortium. Towards shock and mental agony, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- was awarded for the death, is incorrect and the same is set aside. Rs. 4,000/- is only awarded towards transportation and funeral expenses and the same is enhanced to Rs. 25,000/-. No amount was awarded towards loss of estate and a sum of Rs. 5000/- is awarded under this head. Thus, award of Rs. 3,19,800/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. Rs. 4,000/- is only awarded towards transportation and funeral expenses and the same is enhanced to Rs. 25,000/-. No amount was awarded towards loss of estate and a sum of Rs. 5000/- is awarded under this head. Thus, award of Rs. 3,19,800/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 8,56,200/-.The rate of interest already awarded by the Tribunal at 6% remains unaltered. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs. 3,19,800/- is enhanced to Rs. 8,56,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit. The second respondent/ Insurance Company is directed to deposit the balance award amount, less the amount already deposited, along with proportionate interest and cost to the credit of claim petition, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The major claimants are permitted to withdraw their share in the award amount, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, with proportionate interest and costs, through RTGS by filing necessary application before the Tribunal. The share of the minor claimants is permitted to be deposited in Fixed Deposit in any one of the nationalized banks, initially for a period of three years, renewable thereafter, till they attain majority. No costs.