The Oriental Ins Co Ltd v. Savithri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN C.M.A.No.4459 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.25287 of 2019 (Through Video Conferencing) The Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd., 22C, Siva Complex, Saradha College Main Road, Fairlands, Salem 636 016. ... Appellant/2nd Respondent vs.
1.Savithri 2.Deepa 3.Sellathal 4.Subramaniya Gounder
...Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners
5.Chettinadu Builders Pvt.Ltd., Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006.
...5th Respondent/1st Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 22.09.2017 made in M.C.O.P.No.2914 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (1 Additional District Judge) Salem.
For Appellant : M/s.S.Arunkumar For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Sathishkumar for Mr.C.Thangaraju For R5 : No Appearance
J U D G M E N T
The appellant Insurance company is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and Decree dated 22.09.2017 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (1 Additional District Judge) Salem in M.C.O.P.No.2914 of 2015.
2. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.22,09,000/- as compensation together with interest at 7.5% per annum, from the date of the claim petition, till the date of deposit, payable by the appellant Insurance Company to the 1st to 4th respondents/claimants who
are the wife, the daughter, mother and the father of the deceased S.Ramasamy.
3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant Insurance Company has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased Ramasamy met with an accident on 05.09.2015, while he was riding a Mini Door Auto bearing Reg.No.TN.38.AE.6738 when a Concrete lorry bearing Reg.No.TN.37.X.7836 belonging to the 5th respondent insured with the appellant Insurance Company allegedly driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell down on the road and sustained multiple grievous injuries and died in the hospital.
5. The 1st to 5th respondents filed a claim petition as his dependents for compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-. After considering the evidence, the Tribunal has awarded the aforesaid compensation of Rs.22,09,000/- as compensation, to the claimants who are the 1st to 5th respondents herein.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant - Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal erred in adding 50% towards future prospects. It is submitted that the Tribunal ought to have added only 10% of the income towards future prospects of the deceased. He further submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/3 income of the personal expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/4 income for personal expenses. Therefore, prayed for setting aside the award of the Tribunal .
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the 1st to 4th respondents submitted that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are proper. He submits that the impugned order is well reasoned and requires no interference. Hence he prays for dismissal ofsetting aside the Judgment and decree passed by the Tribunal.
8. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and the 1st to 4th respondents and I have also perused the evidence on record and the impugned Judgment and Decree passed by the Tribunal.
9. It is seen from the records that the deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased ought to have been restricted to 1/4th of the income and not 1/3rd of the income as was done by the Tribunal in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121,
10. Considering the fact that the accident is of the year 2015, this Court is inclined to accept the notional
income of the deceased as Rs.13,500/- p.m. The Tribunal has also wrongly deducted 1/3rd of the income towards the personal expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 12.
11. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 , the Tribunal ought to have added future prospects at 10% to the income of the deceased. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Nanuram @ Chuhru Ram and Others, (2018) 18 SCC 130 : 2018 Online SC 1546, thus the amount awarded towards loss of various consortium is to be modified. The compensation awarded is therefore re-quantified as follows:- Sl .N o Description Amount awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) Amount awarded by this Court (Rs.) Award confirmed or enhanced or granted or reduced Loss of dependency *Rs.15,84,00 0/- # Rs.14,70,150/- reduced Medical expenses Rs.
5,40,000Rs.
5,40,000/- Confirmed Transport expenses Rs.
5,000/- ## Rs.
5,000/- Enhanced Loss of consortium Rs.
20,000/- Rs.
40,000/- Confirmed Loss of love and affection Rs.
20,000/- Rs.
1,20,000/- Enhanced Reduced by a sum of Rs.34,000/ - Total Rs.22,09,000 /- Rs.21,75,150/- Rounded off to Rs.21,75,000/- * (Rs.18,000 x 1/3x12x11) # (Rs.13,500 + 10% x 12 - 1/4 x 11) 12.
Therefore, the appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the re-quantified amount of compensation of Rs.21,75,000/- together with interest at 7.5% from the date of claim petition till the date of such deposit, less any amount already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
13. On such deposit, the 1st to 4th respondents are permitted to withdraw their shares together with interest thereon and proportionate costs as directed by the Tribunal, less any amount already withdrawn, by filing suitable applications before the Tribunal.
14. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed with the above observations. No cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Deputy Registrar(R) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kkd To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (1 Additional District Judge) Salem.
Copy To The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
+2ccs to Mr.C.Thangaraju, Advocate SR.No.23945 C.M.A.No.4459 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.25287 of 2019 NR(CO) GMY(25/11/2021)