← Library
Madras High CourtCMA/2084/2015dismissed

The Branch Manager v. Jayalakshmi

2020-03-09Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09-03-2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM C.M.A. No.2084 of 2015 And M.P.No.1 of 2015 The Branch Manager, M/s.Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, Indian Mutual Building, First Floor, No.221, Cubbonpat Main Road, N.R.Square, Bangalore-560 002.

.. Appellant/Respondent No.3 vs.

1.Mrs.Jayalakshmi .. Respondent No.1/Petitioner No.1 2.Thiru Ramaiah .. Respondent No.2/Petitioner No.2 3.Mrs.Gowramma .. Respondent No.3/Petitioner No.3 4.Miss Madhavi .. Respondent No.4/Petitioner No.4 5.Miss.Munirathina .. Respondent No.5/Petitioner No.5 6.Thiru R.Balaji Deepan .. Respondent No.6/RespondentNo.1 7.Thiru B.G.Soma Shekar .. Respondent No.7/RespondentNo.2 The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2013 passed in M.C.O.P.No.107 of 2011 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Additional District Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Krishnagiri. For Appellant : Mr.J.Chandran For Respondents 1, 3to5 : Mr.Mukund R.Pandiyan

J U D G M E N T

The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Additional District Courtcum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Krishnagiri in M.C.O.P.No.107 of 2011.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant mainly contended that there is a negligent on the part of the driver of the vehicle and on account of such negligence, the accident had occurred and therefore, the Tribunal has committed an error in not fixing the negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle. The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the Award amount of Rs.10,67,000/- is exorbitant and therefore, the Award amount is to be fixed in accordance with law.

3. The accident occurred on 19.02.2010 at about 13.45 hours, the deceased Rajendran @ Rajappa was proceeding near the 'U' Turn at Shoolagiri in Hosur to Krishnagiri National Highways. At that time, the driver of the Sangeetha Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-B-8881 was driven the same in a rash and negligent manner, suddenly dashed against the said Rajendran @ Rajappa and due to the impact, Rajendran sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. The accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the second respondent's bus. The Shoolagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District registered a case in Crime No.60 of 2010 under Sections 279, 337 and 304 (A) of IPC. At the time of accident, the said Rajendran @ Rajappa was aged about 23 years and was earning more than Rs.7,500/- per month.

He was doing the seasonal business, but due to the sudden demise of the breadwinner, the first petitioner, being the wife of the deceased, sustained great mental shock, the second petitioner is the father and the third petitioner is the mother of the deceased. They both have lost their lovable brother and supporter in their future. The fifth petitioner is a mute and there is no chance of marriage and she was wholly depending on the deceased. The deceased was the sole breadwinner of the family.

4. The Tribunal adjudicated the issues and arrived a conclusion that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. The Tribunal fixed the quantum of compensation as Rs.10,67,000/-. The accident occurred on 19.02.2010 and the deceased was doing seasonal business and therefore, the fixation of monthly income of Rs.6,500/- by the Tribunal, cannot be said to be excess. Applying the deduction process, the Tribunal arrived Rs.4,500/- for the purpose of applying the multiplier and accordingly, granted a total compensation of Rs.10,67,000/- on various heads. This Court do not find any perversity or infirmity with reference to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, as the deceased was the sole breadwinner of the family and at the time of accident, he was aged about 23 years.

5. This being the factum, the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2013 passed by the learned Additional District

Judge, Additional District Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Krishnagiri in M.C.O.P.No.107 of 2011 is confirmed and consequently, C.M.A.No.2084 of 2012 stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

6. The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire Award amount along with accrued interest, if not already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the respondents-claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire Award amount along with an accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum by filing an appropriate application and as per the apportionment granted by the Tribunal in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The payments are to be made only through RTGS. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Svn To 1.The Additional District Judge, Additional District Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Krishnagiri.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras -104.

+1cc to Mr.Mukund R.Pandiyan, Advocate, S.R.No. 21403 CMA No.2084 of 2015 VG II(CO) GN(30/09/2020)