Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1700 (MAD)

Subramani v. Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd.

2020-09-28

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

body2020
JUDGMENT : (The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 19.07.2012 passed in M.C.O.P. No.495 of 2009 on the file of the learned Sub Judge, Sub Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Harur. 1. The judgment and decree dated 19.07.2012 passed in M.C.O.P. No.495 of 2009 by the learned Sub Judge, Sub Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Harur, is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The claimants, who are the appellants herein, have filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The accident occurred on 09.09.2009 at about 09.25 A.M. at Kadathur to Asthagiriyoor Cross Road, near Union Office. The Kadathur Police Station registered a case in Crime No.212 of 2009 under Sections 279 and 304 (A) of IPC. 4. The deceased was travelling in the TNSTC Bus bearing Registration No.TN-29-N-1716 from Asthagiriyoor to Kadathur. The accident occurred and due to the accident, the deceased boy sustained fatal injuries. The deceased boy was aged about 16 years at the time of accident. 5. The claim petition was filed by the appellants-claimants, who are the parents of the deceased, before the Tribunal. 6. The Tribunal adjudicated the issues with reference to the documents and evidences produced by the respective parties. 7. The Tribunal relied on Ex.P-1 FIR copy and the oral evidence of PW-2, who is the eye-witness, who was travelled on the same day along with the appellants-claimants. The contents in the FIR corroborates with the evidence of PW-2 as well as PW-1, the father of the deceased. Thus, the Tribunal arrived a conclusion that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus. 8. Regarding the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.15,000/- as notional monthly income and awarded a sum of Rs.2,70,000/-. The total compensation of Rs.3,10,000/- is granted by the Tribunal. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-claimants mainly contended that the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is inadequate. The deceased was studying XI Standard in Government Higher Secondary School, Kadathur. Therefore, the total compensation of Rs.3,10,000/- granted by the Tribunal is inadequate and not in accordance with the principles laid down by the Courts. 10. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants-claimants mainly contended that the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is inadequate. The deceased was studying XI Standard in Government Higher Secondary School, Kadathur. Therefore, the total compensation of Rs.3,10,000/- granted by the Tribunal is inadequate and not in accordance with the principles laid down by the Courts. 10. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Transport Corporation disputed the contentions raised on behalf of the appellants-claimants by stating that the Tribunal has fixed a sum of Rs.15,000/- as notional income, which is reasonable and the total award of compensation is also in accordance with the principles. Thus, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 11. This Court is of the considered opinion the fact that the factum regarding the accident was established before the Tribunal. The negligence aspect was also fixed on the driver of the respondent-Transport Corporation bus driver and consequently, the respondent-Transport Corporation is liable to pay compensation to the appellants-claimants. 12. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, undoubtedly, a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- granted by the Tribunal as total compensation is inadequate. The accident occurred in the year 2009 and the deceased was aged about 16 years at the time of accident and was studying XI Standard. This being the factum of the case, the Tribunal ought to have granted compensation by fixing the notional income as Rs.30,000/- per month. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal stands modified as detailed hereunder:- Loss of income (Rs.30,000/-x16) Rs. 4,80,000/- Love and Affection (Rs.40,000/-x2) 80,000/- Loss of Estate 15,000/- For Funeral Expenses 15,000/- Total Rs.5,90,000/- Thus, the appellants-claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.5,90,000/- with accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 13. The respondent-Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, being made, the appellants-claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire award amount along with accrued interest by filing an appropriate application before the Tribunal and payments are to be made through RTGS. 14. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 19.07.2012 passed in M.C.O.P. No.495 of 2009 by the learned Sub Judge, Sub Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Harur, stands modified and consequently, CMA No.3704 of 2019 is allowed in part. 14. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 19.07.2012 passed in M.C.O.P. No.495 of 2009 by the learned Sub Judge, Sub Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Harur, stands modified and consequently, CMA No.3704 of 2019 is allowed in part. However, there shall be no order as to costs.