Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 3421 (MAD)

Murugeshwari v. Gnanamuthu

2018-10-01

V.M.VELUMANI

body2018
JUDGMENT 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to enhance the award amount in M.C.O.P. No. 934 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track Court No. 2), Tirunelveli, dated 05.03.2012. 2. The appellants are the claimants in M.C.O.P. No. 934 of 2011, claiming a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) for the death of one Amirtha Singh, who is the husband of the first appellant, father of the second appellant and son of the third appellant, in the accident that took place on 06.09.2003. 3. The first respondent herein remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. 4. Before the Tribunal, the first appellant herein examined herself as PW-1, one Pitchaiya was examined as PW-2 and marked four documents as Exs.P1 to P4. The respondents did not examine any person and mark any documents. 5. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, both oral and documentary evidence let in by both the parties, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the car, belonging to the first respondent and awarded a sum of Rs. 6,95,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Only) as compensation to the appellants. 6. Not being satisfied with the said award of the Tribunal, the appellants have come out with the present appeal. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the deceased was a Van driver and the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income at Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) and awarded compensation. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal are too meagre and prayed for enhancement of compensation. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent contended that the Tribunal awarded compensation, appreciating the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence. There is no reason to enhance the compensation and prayed for dismissal of this appeal. 9. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the second respondent. 10. It is not in dispute that the deceased was a Van driver. In the claim petition, the appellants have contended that the deceased was having own Van and was earning a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month. The appellants have not substantiated this contention. On the other hand, the appellants have marked Ex.P.4, Certificate issued by I.E.L.C. Public School that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 17,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Only) per month. 10,000/- per month. The appellants have not substantiated this contention. On the other hand, the appellants have marked Ex.P.4, Certificate issued by I.E.L.C. Public School that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 17,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Only) per month. The Tribunal taking note of the contradictory stand taken by the appellant, rejected Ex.P.4 and fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only), which is reasonable. The age of the deceased is 38 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal did not award any amount towards future prospects. The appellants are entitled to 40% towards future prospects. The appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 8,40,000/- (5,000 + 2,000 x 2/3 x 12 x 15) towards loss of income. The amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of income and loss of estate is set aside. The Tribunal has not awarded proper compensation under various heads. 11. Therefore, the first appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) towards loss of consortium and the appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) towards loss of estate and for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) for funeral expenses. 12. In view of the above, the amounts of the Tribunal are modified as follows:- Description Amount awarded by Tribunal Amount awarded by this Court Award confirmed or enhanced or granted For loss of income and loss of estate Rs. 6,45,000 --- Set aside For loss of income --- Rs. 8,40,000 Awarded For loss of estate --- Rs. 15,000 Awarded For loss of consortium and love and affection Rs. 40,000 --- Set aside For loss of consortium to the first appellant --- Rs. 40,000 Awarded For loss of funeral expenses Rs. 10,000 Rs. 15,000 Enhanced Total Rs. 6,95,000 Rs. 9,10,000 By enhancing a sum of Rs. 2,15,000/- 13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. The interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 8% is reduced to 7.5% from the date of filing claim petition, till the date of deposit. 14. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 6,95,000 Rs. 9,10,000 By enhancing a sum of Rs. 2,15,000/- 13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. The interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 8% is reduced to 7.5% from the date of filing claim petition, till the date of deposit. 14. The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,15,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifteen Thousand Only) jointly or severally with accrued interest and costs to the credit of M.C.O.P. No. 934 of 2011, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court No. 2), Tirunelveli, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment, less the amount, if any, already deposited. On such deposit being made, the first appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,50,000/- the second appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- and the third appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,10,000/- with interest by making necessary application before the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall deposit the amount awarded to the second appellant in any one of the Nationalized Bank in a Fixed Deposit initially for a period of three years and renewable thereafter, till the minor attain majority. The mother of the second appellant is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months directly from the Bank. No costs.