The Divisional Manager v. K.Malarkodi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.09.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE C.M.A.No.1521 of 2013 The Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Katpadi Road, TKM Complex, Vellore-4.
... Appellant/R2 ..Vs..
1. K.Malarkodi, W/o.Late. P.P.Kannan
2. Minor K.Govardhani, D/o.Late. P.P.Kannan
3. Minor K.Raman, S/o.Late. P.P.Kannan 4.Minor K.Lakshmanan, S/o.Late. P.P.Kannan (Minors rep.by R1 K.Malarkodi) .. Respondents1 to 4/ Petitioners
5. Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore.
.. R5/R1
6. Vanitha, D/o.Late. P.P.Kannan
7. Kavitha, D/o.Late. P.P.Kannan
8. Vijay, S/o.Late. P.P.Kannan
9. Durairajan, S/o.Late. P.P.Kannan ... Respondents 6 to 9/ Respondents3 to 6 Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 24.02.2012 made in MCOP. No.297 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTC) Vellore.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Arunkumar For Respondents: Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj - R1 to R4 M/s.Pandian Associates - R5 Mr.T.P.Prabhakaran - For R6 to R9
JUDGMENT
(This Appeal was taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing) This appeal has been filed by the Insurance company challenging the impugned award dated 24.02.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTC), Vellore in MCOP.No.297 of 2011.
2. The appellant/Insurance Company has filed this appeal only on the ground that the assessment of compensation made by the Tribunal under the impugned award is excessive and they have not challenged their liability to pay the compensation.
3. The respondents 1 to 4 and 6 to 9 are the legal heirs of the deceased Kannan, who died on 27.08.2007 as a result of an accident caused by a bus bearing Registration No.TN 23 5305, owned by the 5th respondent viz., Christian Medical College Hospital (CMC Hospital) and insured with the appellant/insurance company.
4. The claimants/respondents 1 to 4 have preferred a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vellore in MCOP.No.297 of 2011 seeking compensation for the death of Kannan.
5. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, under the impugned award, directed the appellant/insurance company and the 5th respondent/CMC Hospital to pay a compensation of Rs.13,01,104/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization and costs as compensation to the respondents 1 to 4 and 6 to 9/claimants, who are the wife, sons and daughters of the deceased Kannan. (The respondents 6 to 9, who are the two daughters and sons of the deceased, born through his first wife, were impleaded as parties before the Tribunal)
6. The break-up details of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents 1 to 4 and 6 to 9/claimants are as follows:
Head Award passed by the Tribunal (Rs.) Loss of income 10,99,104/- Loss of consortium to the 1st petitioner/wife 1,00,000/- Loss of love and affection 1,00,000/- Funeral expenses 2,000/- Total 13,01,104/-
7. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, under the impugned award, the appellant/insurance company has preferred this appeal.
8. Heard Mr.S.Arunkumar, learned counsel for the appellant / Insurance company and ,Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj,learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 4, M/s.Pandian Associates, learned counsel for
the 5th respondent/CMC Hospital and Mr.T.P.Prabhakaran, learned counsel for the respondents 6 to 9.
9. Before the Tribunal, the claimants have filed nine documents, which were marked as Exs.P1 to P9 and three witnesses were examined on their side, namely, PW1 to PW3. Mrs.Malarkodi, wife of the deceased was examined as PW1, Mrs.Hemalatha, an eyewitness to the accident, was examined as PW2 and Mr.Narayanan, Assistant in the Legal Department of LIC, was examined as PW3. On the side of the appellant/insurance company, four documents were filed, which were marked as Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and one witness was examined as RW1 before the Tribunal. ''The only issue for consideration in this appeal is whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive or not.''
10. The deceased P.P.Kannan, died on 27.08.2007, as a result of the accident, caused by a bus owned by the 5th respondent/CMC Hospital and insured with the appellant. The deceased was aged 50 years at the time of the accident, which has been proved through the post-morterm certificate (Ex.P2). The deceased was working as a Record Clerk in LIC of India, Vellore, at the time of the accident. Ex.P6 is the Pay Slip of the deceased Kannan for the month of July-2007. Ex.P8 - Salary Certificate issued by Pay Disbursement Officer, LIC of India, Vellore, dated 07.01.2012, reveals that the last drawn basic pay of the deceased was Rs.15,685/-, which includes FPF - Rs,390/-, HRA - Rs.1098/- totally Rs.17,173/-. PW3-Mr.Narayanan, Assistant in the Legal Department, LIC of India, has also deposed that the deceased Kannan was having 4 years and 11 months more service as on the date of his death. He has deposed that the normal date of retirement of the deceased was 31.07.2012. Ex.P9 is the Service Certificate issued by LIC of India, Vellore Divisional Office, dated 28.01.2012.
11. The Tribunal has applied split multiplier i.e. '5' multiplier for remaining period of service till the superannuation of the deceased and has adopted '6' multiplier, thereafter and has arrived at a compensation of Rs.10,99,104/- towards loss of income to the claimants. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium to the first claimant and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection to the respondents 6 to 9. In all put together, the appellant/Insurance Company was directed to pay a total compensation of Rs.13,01,104/- together with interest and costs. However, the Tribunal has failed to award any compensation towards loss of future prospects, which the claimants are legally entitled to as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Shethi and Others reported in 2017 (16) SCC
680. The Tribunal has applied the second schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act for the purpose of adopting the multiplier for the two split up periods.
12. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 (SC), the Tribunal ought to have adopted the multiplier as applicable under the said judgment, which will be lesser than what was adopted by the Tribunal, under the impugned award.
13. Having not awarded loss of future prospects to the appellants/claimants and having adopted a wrong multiplier, the compensation awarded under the impugned award will be more or less same, if loss of future prospects as well as the correct multiplier was adopted by the Tribunal and correct conventional damages was also awarded. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view after taking an overall view that there is no scope for interference with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award which in the considered view of this Court, is a just compensation.
Conclusion:
14. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this appeal. Accordingly, this Appeal shall stand dismissed.
15. The Appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire Award amount together with interest from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit and costs, as assessed by the Tribunal, after deducting the amount, if any, already deposited to the credit of MCOP.No.297 of 2011, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the respective shares of the compensation amount to the respective bank accounts of the respondents 1 and 4 and 6 to 9/claimants through RTGS within a period of two weeks thereafter.
16. Insofar as the share of the third and fourth respondents/minor claimants are concerned, the same shall be deposited in a fixed deposits in any one of the Nationalized Banks till they attain the age of majority, and till such time, the interest accrued thereon shall be withdrawn by the guardian of the minor claimants once in three months, directly from the Bank. If the respondents 3 and 4/minor claimants have attained the age of majority, it is open to them to file a formal petition before the Tribunal to get their share of apportionment.
17. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. There is no order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rli To 1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, FTC, Vellore.
2. The Section Officer V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
+1cc to Mr.S.P.Yuvaraj, Advocate SR.No. 28693 C.M.A.No.1521 of 2013 A.SK(22.04.2021)