Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1169 (MAD)

M. Tamilselvi v. K. Kandasamy

2018-03-21

A.M.BASHEER AHAMED

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Decreetal order made in MCOP No.56 of 2006, dated 25.10.2010, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Kulithalai. 2. The appellants herein are the claimants, filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.56 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Kulithalai, claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-, for the death of Mohanasundaram, in a fatal accident, happened on 14.11.2008, at about 8.30 Hrs., while he was travelling in the front seat of the car Mahindra Logan, bearing Registration No.TN-39-AP-3838, driven by its driver from south to north along Dharapuram - Tiruppur Road, passing Sri Devi Matriculation School at Velampatti, a TVS 50 XL Moped, bearing Registration No.TN-45-S-8021, which was going in front of the car, suddenly try to turn right side of the road, without any indication, the driver of the car slammed on the breaks to stop the car, but the car hit the moped due to the speed and the victim/deceased sustained grievous injuries and he died on the way to hospital. 3. The first respondent herein is the owner-cum-driver of the Mahindran Logan Car, bearing Registration No.TN-39-AP-3838 and drove the said car on the date of occurrence. The 2nd respondent herein is the Insurer of the said car. The 3rd respondent herein is the owner of the said two wheeler viz., TVS 50 Moped, bearing Registration No.TN-45-S-8021 and the 4th respondent herein is the Insurer of the said TVS 50 XL Moped vehicle. The 3rd respondent was set ex-parte before the Tribunal. The respondents 1, 2 and 4 contested the claim petition by filing counter statement separately. 4. The 1st claimant is the wife of the deceased. The 2nd and 3rd are the minor sons of the deceased. The 4th and 5th claimants are the father and mother of the deceased. 5. In order to prove the claim, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.P1 to 19 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced and no document was marked by the respondents. 6. The 4th and 5th claimants are the father and mother of the deceased. 5. In order to prove the claim, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.P1 to 19 were marked on the side of the claimants. No evidence was adduced and no document was marked by the respondents. 6. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record and also hearing both sides held that the deceased died only due to rash and negligence driving of the first respondent and awarded a sum of Rs.10,63,000/-, as compensation, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of application and costs and directed the 2nd respondent to pay and deposit the above amount of compensation and dismissed the claim against the 3rd and 4th respondent in its order dated 28.10.2010. 7. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants filed this appeal before this Court. The first respondent is set ex-parte in this appeal. R3 and R4 were also set ex-parte. 8. The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,500/- and the relevant multiplier for the age of 40 years of the deceased and after deducting 1/3rd of the income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, determined the loss of income due to the death of the deceased as Rs.10,50,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3000/- towards transport charges; a sum of Rs.5000/- towards love and affection and consortium and a sum of Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses and totally, a sum of Rs.10,63,000/- was awarded. 9. The counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration regarding the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.12,500/- towards the salary and other allowances. As per the evidence of P.W.3, a sum of Rs.12,500/- given to the deceased towards his monthly salary and other allowances prior to the date of accident/death of deceased in the accident. The deceased was working as Production Manager in a partnership Firm viz., M/s. BGM Knit Wears at Tiruppur. The salary vouchers given to the deceased are marked as Exs.P15 to 17. The letter of appointing the deceased as Production Manager of the said Company is marked as Ex.P14. The above documents were marked in the evidence of P.W.3/partner of the above said Firm. 10. The salary vouchers given to the deceased are marked as Exs.P15 to 17. The letter of appointing the deceased as Production Manager of the said Company is marked as Ex.P14. The above documents were marked in the evidence of P.W.3/partner of the above said Firm. 10. No reason is assigned by the Tribunal for not taking into account regarding the monthly salary and other allowances as Rs.12,500/-. There was no contra evidence produced by the contesting respondents against the evidence of P.W.3 and also the salary vouchers. Hence, the monthly income of the deceased, prior to the date of the occurrence, by way of salary and other allowances, is fixed as Rs.12,500/- in this appeal. 11. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurer/2nd respondent herein conceded that the claimants are entitled to 25% of the salary towards future prospects, since the deceased was working in private company and also they are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses; Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and also Rs.40,000/- towards consortium for the surviving spouse under the conventional heads, as per the recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in [2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC)]. 12. As per the Judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma & Ors Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another, reported in [2009 (5) LW 56 (SC)], the relevant multiplier is 15' for the age of 40 years of the deceased. Hence, the loss of income/loss of dependency due to death of deceased Mohanasundaram, who died in the fatal accident, is calculated as follows:- (i) Monthly income, by way of salary and other allowances as per Exs.P15 to 17, is fixed as Rs.12,500/-. Future prospects per month 25% as conceded by the Insurer stated supra comes to Rs.3,125/- and added to monthly salary, which comes totally Rs.15,625/- per month. Number of dependents in this case is more than four claimants. Hence, 1/4th towards personal living expenses is to be deducted. Appropriate multiplier for the age of 40 years is, 15'. Hence, the loss of dependency = 15625 x 12 x 15 x s = Rs.21,09,375/-. Hence, this Court concludes that the appellants are entitled to get Rs.21,09,375/- towards loss of dependency, for the death of the said Mohanasundaram. Hence, 1/4th towards personal living expenses is to be deducted. Appropriate multiplier for the age of 40 years is, 15'. Hence, the loss of dependency = 15625 x 12 x 15 x s = Rs.21,09,375/-. Hence, this Court concludes that the appellants are entitled to get Rs.21,09,375/- towards loss of dependency, for the death of the said Mohanasundaram. Further, a sum of Rs.70,000/- towards the conventional heads, as conceded by the Insurer in this appeal stated supra and also a sum of Rs.3000/-, awarded by the Tribunal towards transporting expenses, which is not excessive and awarding totally, a sum of Rs.21,82,375/-, is fair and reasonable compensation in this appeal for the death of Mohanasundaram, who died in the fatal accident. (ii) In the above stated circumstances, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal, enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.10,63,000/- to Rs.21,82,375/- [Rs.21,82,375 - 10,63,000 = 11,19,375/-] with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application and costs. 13. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, enhancing the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.10,63,000/- to Rs.21,82,375/-. The 2nd respondent herein is directed to deposit the above compensation amount, now fixed by this Court, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Kulithalai, in M.C.O.P. No.56 of 2006. Upon such deposit, the first respondent is permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- with proportionate interest and costs and the minor appellants are entitled to Rs.5,00,000/- each with proportionate interests and costs. The 4th and 5th respondents are permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.2,32,375/- respectively with proportionate interests and costs. 14. The Tribunal is directed to deposit the shares of Minors, in any one of the Nationalized Bank, renewable for a period of once in three years, till the minors attained the majority. The 1st appellant, as the guardian of the said minors, is permitted to withdraw the interest, once in six months, for the welfare of the minors. No costs.