The Mananging Director, v. Manickamma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.09.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA C.M.A.No.2075 of 2016 & CMP.No.15156 of 2016 The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam ..
Appellant/Respondent -vs1. Manickamma W/o late Ponnusami
2. Tamilselvi D/o late Ponnusami ..
Respondents/Petitioner Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 26.11.2015 made in M.C.O.P.No.132 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Perambalur.
For Appellant ::
Mr.D.Venkatachalam For Respondents/Caveators::
Mr.T.Gobinath
JUDGMENT
The impugned award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Perambalur in M.C.O.P.No.132 of 2013 dated 26.11.2015 awarding a sum of Rs.8,42,000/- for the loss of life of the breadwinner of the claimants' family is questioned by the Managing Director of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited in this appeal only against the quantum of compensation, on the ground that the Tribunal, instead of deducting 50% of the actual salary of the deceased, has wrongly deducted 1/3rd of the actual salary, which is not permissible in law, more particularly, as per the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case, 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC).
2. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is liable to be rejected in limine for two reasons. Firstly, as per the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case, 2009 (2) TN MAC 1(SC), where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents, 50% of the actual salary is deducted as the personal and living expenses of the deceased, because it is assumed that the bachelor would tend to spend more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also a possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the parents and siblings is likely to be cut drastically. Moreover, subject to evidence to the contrary, the father is likely to have his own income and his father will not be considered as dependant and mother alone will be considered as dependant.
In the same judgment, it has been clearly held that where the family of the bachelor is large and dependent on the income of the deceased, as in a case where he has a widowed mother and large number of younger non-earning sisters or brothers, his personal and living expenses could be restricted to one-third and the contribution to the family could be taken as two-third. In the present case, the son of the first claimant, aged about 36 years, while travelling as a pillionrider in the Yamaha Motorcycle bearing Registration No.TAA 1876 on 24.12.2012, was run over by the bus belonging to the appellant Corporation due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver, leaving behind his widowed mother and widowed sister as orphans.
Therefore, when his widowed mother and widowed sister were dependent on his income, as ruled by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case, personal and living expenses of the deceased can be restricted to 1/3rd and the contribution to the family can be taken as 2/3rd. On this basis, the Tribunal has made the 1/3rd deduction, instead of 50%. Secondly, although the income of the deceased was claimed at Rs.15,000/- per month as an Astrologer by producing his visiting card marked as Ex.P5, the Tribunal has fixed Rs.6000/- as the notional monthly income of the deceased. While doing so, as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's case, 50% of the actual salary should have been added towards future prospects. But in the present case, the Tribunal has completely omitted to add anything towards future prospects.
Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation arrived at by the Tribunal on the facts of this case. Accordingly, confirming the impugned award, the civil miscellaneous appeal is dismissed. Consequently, C.M.P.No.15156 of 2016 is also dismissed. No costs.
3. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that only the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- has been deposited. Therefore, the appellant is directed to deposit the entire balance award amount along with interest thereon to the credit of the M.C.O.P.No.132 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Perambalur
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such deposit, it is for the claimants to withdraw the apportioned amount along with accrued interest by moving appropriate applications before the Tribunal. -s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar ss To 1 The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal The Principal District Judge Perambalur +1 cc to Mr.D.Venkatachalam Advocate sr 55146 +1 cc to Mr.J.Gobinath Advocate sr 55349 C.M.A.No.2075 of 2016 msm(co) aa25/10/2016