Sangeetha v. M/S.Sri Balamalai Murugan Transport (By Its Proprietor)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.11.2023
CORAM
MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE C.M.A.No.2125 and 2126 of 2022 1.Sangeetha 2.Minor V.Vishnu 3.Minor V.Vishwa 4.K.Rani (Minor Appellants 2 and 3 rep. by their mother and natural guardian Sangeetha/1st Appellant ) ... Appellants in C.M.A.No.2125 of 2022 1.V.Chitra 2.V.Vignesh 3.V.Dinesh 4.V.Divya 5.K.Rani ... Appellants in C.M.A.No.2126 of Vs.
1.M/s.Sri Balamalai Murugan Transport (by its proprietor) SBM Complex, Natchimuthu Nagar, K.Paramathy Post, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District-639207.
1/10
2.The Branch Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd.
Opposite to Kumudham Petrol Bunk, Upstairs of Sundaram Hardware Shop, Nellikuppam, Cuddaore-607001.
... Respondents in both the C.M.As Prayer in C.M.A.No.2125 of 2022: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Acct, 1988, seeking to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021, dated 25.07.2022 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. Prayer in C.M.A.No.2126 of 2022: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Acct, 1988, seeking to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation in M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021, dated 25.07.2022 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / I Additional District and Sessions Judge FAC, Cuddalore. For Appellants : Ms.Ramya V.Rao in both C.M.As For Respondents : No Appearance - R1 Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam for R2 in both C.M.As 2/10
COMMON
JUDGMENT
The appellants in these twin appeals are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 and M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021, respectively. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded for the death of two persons in a single accident, the claimants have preferred this appeal. The victim in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 was a rider of the motorcycle and the victim in M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021 was his pillion. 2.The accident took place on 18.07.2021 at around 17.00 hrs in the evening when a goods carrier belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent knocked the motorcycle, on which the victims were traveling, from behind.
3.As outlined earlier, in both the cases, the dependents of the victims of the accident have preferred separate claim petitions. Regarding the victim in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021, he was a rider of the motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-31-BK-8563. He was 33 years old and worked as a Washerman at the time of the accident. Turning to the victim in 3/10
M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021, he was the brother of the victim in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 and was a pillion rider. He was 41 years old and worked as a Loadman and Washerman, earning Rs.45,000/- per month at the time of the accident. Both victims died on the spot. 4.Seeking compensation, the claimants of the victim in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 approached the Tribunal, and the Tribunal had reckoned the notional income at Rs.12,000/-, to which it added 40% towards future prospects, applied 16 as a multiplier and deducted 1/4 towards personal expenditure of the victim, and arrived at a net value of dependency at Rs.24,19,200/-. After adding compensation payable on other conventional heads, the Tribunal arrived at a total compensation of Rs.26,38,200/-, and the breakup is as below:
Sl.No.
Description Award amount (in Rs.) 1.
Loss of Income 24,19,200 2.
Loss of spousal consortium 44,000 3.
Loss of parental consortium 88,000 4.
Loss of filial consortium 44,000 5.
Funeral expenses and loss of estate 33,000 6.
Transport expenses 10,000 Total amount 26,38,200 4/10
5.Seeking compensation, the claimants of the victim in M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021 approached the Tribunal, and the Tribunal had reckoned the notional income at Rs.12,000/-, to which it added 25% towards future prospects, applied 14 as a multiplier and deducted 1/4 towards personal expenditure of the victim, and arrived at a net value of dependency at Rs.18,90,000/-. After adding compensation payable on other conventional heads, the Tribunal arrived at a total compensation of Rs.21,53,000/-, and the breakup is as below:
Sl.No.
Description Award amount (in Rs.) 1.
Loss of Income 18,90,000 2.
Loss of spousal consortium 44,000 3.
Loss of parental consortium 1,32,000 4.
Loss of filial consortium 44,000 5.
Funeral expenses and loss of estate 33,000 6.
Transport expenses 10,000 Total amount 21,53,000 6.Ms.Ramya V.Rao, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the only grievance of the claimants is that the notional income has been unrealistically fixed by the Tribunal, given the fact that the accident took place in July, 2021.
5/10
7.Heard Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent, who submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under each heads are just and reasonable and does not warrant any interference of this Court.
8.On a fair appraisal of the statement made, this Court, considers that Rs.14,000/- per month would be realistic, given the cost of living for the year 2021, in both the cases. Asfar as M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 is concerned, this Court fixes Rs.14,000/- as notional income, to which it adds another 40% towards future prospects on the basis of the ratio in National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others [2017 2 TANMAC 609], applies 16 as a multiplier and deducts 1/4 towards personal expenditure of the victim and arrived at a net value of loss of dependency at Rs.28,22,400/-. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are modified and adjusted as hereunder:- Sl.
No Description Amount awarded by Tribunal (Rs.) Amount awarded by this Court (Rs.) Award confirmed or enhanced or granted 1.
Loss of Income 24,19,200 28,22,400 Enhanced 2.
Loss of spousal 44,000 44,000 Confirmed 6/10
consortium 3.
Loss of parental consortium 88,000 88,000 Confirmed 4.
Loss of filial consortium 44,000 44,000 Confirmed 5.
Funeral expenses and loss of estate 33,000 33,000 Confirmed 6.
Transport expenses 10,000 10,000 Confirmed Grand Total 26,38,200 30,41,400 Enhanced by Rs.4,03,200/- 9.Insofar as M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021 is concerned, this Court fixes Rs.14,000/- as notional income, to which it adds another 25% towards future prospects on the basis of the ratio in National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others [2017 2 TANMAC 609], applies 14 as a multiplier and deducts 1/4 towards personal expenditure of the victim and arrived at a net value of loss of dependency at Rs.22,05,000/-. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are modified and adjusted as hereunder:- 7/10
Sl.
No Description Amount awarded by Tribunal (Rs.) Amount awarded by this Court (Rs.) Award confirmed or enhanced or granted 1.
Loss of Income 18,90,000 22,05,000 Enhanced 2.
Loss of spousal consortium 44,000 44,000 Confirmed 3.
Loss of parental consortium 1,32,000 1,32,000 Confirmed 4.
Loss of filial consortium 44,000 44,000 Confirmed 5.
Funeral expenses and loss of estate 33,000 33,000 Confirmed 6.
Transport expenses 10,000 10,000 Confirmed Grand Total 21,53,000 24,68,000 Enhanced by Rs.3,15,000/- 10.To conclude, these appeals stand partly allowed and the award of the Tribunal is modified. This Court is informed that the second respondent had already deposited the entire sum awarded by the Tribunal in both the cases. Therefore, the second respondent is now required to deposit the differential sum of Rs.4,03,200/- to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 and Rs.3,15,000/- to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.650 of 2021 along with interest at 7.5% from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy 8/10
of this Judgment. On such deposit being made, the appellants 1 and 4 in C.M.A.No.2125 of 2022 and the appellants in C.M.A.No.2126 of 2022 are permitted to withdraw the award amount falling to their share, along with proportionate interest and costs as awarded by the Tribunal, less, the amount, if any already withdrawn. The amount due to the minors shall be deposited in a Nationalized Bank. Till the minors attain majority, the quarterly interest can be withdrawn by the first appellant for the maintenance of the minors. The claimants in both the appeals are directed to pay the necessary Court fee for the enhanced compensation amount, if required. The Tribunal below shall not disburse the enhanced amount till such time the certified copy showing proof of payment of Court fee is produced by the claimants. No Costs.
03.11.2023 Anu Index: Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order N.SESHASAYEE, J.
9/10
Anu To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. C.M.A.Nos.2125 and 2126 of 2022 03.11.2023 10/10