Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1897 (MAD)

Hannah Angelin v. Parveen Travels Pvt. Ltd.

2019-07-19

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, N.KIRUBAKARAN

body2019
JUDGMENT : N. Kirubakaran, J. 1. CMA No. 130 of 2014 has been filed by the wife and minor child of the deceased and CMA No. 3312 of 2017 has been filed by the parents of the deceased. 2. The appeals have been preferred by respective appellants aggrieved by the award passed by the Claims Tribunal in MCOP No. 164 of 2009 for the death of one Suresh Sundar, aged about 30 years, an Assistant Consultant (Grade C3A) in TCS Co. Ltd., allegedly earning a sum of Rs. 84,279 in the accident occurred on 16.4.2008 when he was driving his two-wheeler near Siruseri which was hit down by the bus belonging to Parveen Travels Pvt. Ltd. and insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. 3. Heard Mr. A.S. Bilal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the wife and the child of the deceased, Mr. S. Parthasarathy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parents of the deceased, and Mr. Chandrasekara Bharathy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the insurance company. 4. The only question to be decided in this case is with regard to adequacy of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. There is no appeal filed by the insurance company against the finding of the Tribunal regarding negligence that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the bus. Therefore, the negligence aspect has attained its finality. 5. The deceased was working as an Assistant Consultant (Grade C3A) in TCS Co. Ltd., Siruseri, at the time of accident, as per the evidence of PW 3 and PW 4 who are respectively Assistant General Manager and Assistant Manager of Tata Consultancy. Apart from Exh. P8/letter of appointment issued by TCS, Exh. P9/pay slip of the deceased for the months of January and February with earning statement for the financial year 2007-2008, Exh. P10/pay slip of the deceased for the months of March and April 2008 were also marked before the Tribunal to prove the income of the deceased. The claim of the appellants was that monthly salary earned by the deceased was Rs. 84,279. However, the Tribunal had taken the gross salary at Rs. 73,446.53 per month. Therefore, the appellants sought for re-determination of the monthly income at Rs. 84,279. However the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company would seek to reduce the same. The Claims Tribunal after determining the monthly income of Rs. 84,279. However, the Tribunal had taken the gross salary at Rs. 73,446.53 per month. Therefore, the appellants sought for re-determination of the monthly income at Rs. 84,279. However the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company would seek to reduce the same. The Claims Tribunal after determining the monthly income of Rs. 73,446.53 deducted a sum of Rs. 4,209 which was given to the deceased towards conveyance allowance, personal allowance and vehicle maintenance allowance and fixed a sum of Rs. 69,237 as monthly income of the deceased. 6. Though Mr. Chandrasekara Bharathy, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company, relied upon the two-Judge Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Indira Srivastava, 2008 ACJ 614 (SC), to contend that reimbursement towards medical allowance is to be deducted, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants relied upon the three-Judge Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in Manasvi Jain v. Delhi Transport Corpn., 2014 ACJ 1416 (SC), where the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the deduction towards income tax/surcharge alone should be considered to arrive at the net income of the deceased. Para 12 of the said judgment is usefully extracted as follows: "(12) This court in Shyamwati Sharma v. Karam Singh, 2010 ACJ 1968 (SC), while considering the issues of deduction of taxes, contributions, etc., for arriving at the figure of net monthly income, held that 'while ascertaining the income of the deceased, any deductions shown in the salary certificate as deductions towards GPF, life insurance premium, repayments of loans, etc., should not be excluded from the income. The deduction towards income tax/surcharge alone should be considered to arrive at the net income of the deceased'." Therefore, this court is inclined to follow the larger Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. Accordingly, this court fixes the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 80,070 [Rs. 84,279 (-) Rs. 4,209] after deducting Rs. 4,209 which was given towards conveyance allowance, vehicle maintenance allowance and personal allowance. 8. The Tribunal has added 30 per cent towards future prospects. However, it is found that the deceased was employed in a well reputed IT company, viz., TCS and it is a permanent job and, therefore, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC), 50 per cent has to be added towards future prospects. However, it is found that the deceased was employed in a well reputed IT company, viz., TCS and it is a permanent job and, therefore, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 ACJ 2700 (SC), 50 per cent has to be added towards future prospects. After adding 50 per cent towards future prospects, the monthly income would be Rs. 1,20,105 [Rs. 80,070 (+) Rs. 40,035]. 9. The Tribunal has deducted 73rd towards personal expenses whereas the size of the family is 4 and, therefore, 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses. After deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses, the monthly income would be Rs. 90,079 [Rs. 1,20,105 (-) Rs. 30,027]. Therefore, the yearly income would be Rs. 10,80,948 (Rs. 90,079 x 12). After deducting 10 per cent towards income tax, the yearly income would be Rs. 9,72,853 [Rs. 10,80,948 (-) Rs. 1,08,095]. 10. The Tribunal has determined the age of the deceased as 30 years, based on Exh. P4-post-mortem certificate. As per the age of the deceased, the right multiplier is 17' whereas the Tribunal wrongly applied 16' as multiplier. Therefore, the loss of contribution would be at Rs. 1,65,38,504 (Rs. 9,72,853 x 17). Loss of consortium: 11. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000 towards loss of consortium and the same is enhanced to Rs. 40,000. Loss of love and affection: 12. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000 to the child and Rs. 10,000 each to the parents of the deceased towards loss of love and affection. The amount awarded towards loss of love and affection is akin to the amount awarded towards loss of consortium to the spouse. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 is awarded to the minor claimant who was 8 months old at the time of accident and who did not have the chance to remember his father's face and lost the love and affection of the father for the whole of his life. A sum of Rs. 20,000 each is awarded to the parents of the deceased under this head. 13. Loss to estate, funeral expenses and transportation charges: This court awards a sum of Rs. 15,000 each under these heads. A sum of Rs. 20,000 each is awarded to the parents of the deceased under this head. 13. Loss to estate, funeral expenses and transportation charges: This court awards a sum of Rs. 15,000 each under these heads. The modified compensation is as follows: Head Amount (Rs.) Loss of contribution 1,65,38,504 Loss of consortium 40,000 Loss of estate 15,000 Funeral expenses 15,000 Loss of love and affection 1,40,000 Transportation charges 15,000 Total 1,67,63,504 14. Hence, total compensation payable in this case is Rs. 1,67,63,504 rounded off to Rs. 1,67,70,000, along with interest at the rate of 7.5 per cent per annum. Out of the total modified award amount, the wife of the deceased is entitled to get Rs. 77,70,000, the minor child of the deceased is entitled to get Rs. 50,00,000 and the parents of the deceased are entitled to get Rs. 20,00,000 each. 15. The claimants are directed to pay the requisite court-fee, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, If the requisite court-fee is not paid by the claimants, the Tribunal is directed to deduct the requisite court-fee from the compensation amount awarded to the claimants, as per the ratio fixed by this court and thereafter, transfer the remaining award amount to the claimants' account. 16. The insurance company is directed to deposit the entire award amount along with interest and costs as per the modified award passed by this court within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the respective shares of the major claimants along with interest and costs to the personal bank accounts of the major claimants through RTGS within a period of one week thereon. As far as the share of the minor claimant is concerned, the same shall be deposited in interest bearing fixed deposit in any one of the nationalised banks, till he attains majority. The appellant in CMA No. 130 of 2014/wife of the deceased is permitted to withdraw interest accruing on such deposits once in three months and it should be utilised only for the purpose of education and marriage of the minor claimant alone. 17. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs. 92,86,832 to Rs. 1,67,70,000 with interest, No costs. 17. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs. 92,86,832 to Rs. 1,67,70,000 with interest, No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.