Dismissed

The Oriental Insurance v. Vicotria, W/O Hercules

Madras HC16 Jul 2018CMA(MD)/1636/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Madras High Court dismissed an appeal against an Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award of Rs.8,17,000/-. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the court held that no future prospects should be awarded and the Tribunal's award was reasonable.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed. The appellant was directed to deposit the entire award amount with interest and costs. Minor's share to be deposited in a Nationalised Bank.

The Oriental Insurance Vs Vicotria, W/O Hercules — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.07.2018

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU

¶5

CMA(MD)No.1636 of 2013 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2013

¶6

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Rep.by Branch Manager, Nagercoil Vadasery Village, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶7

... Appellant/3^rd Respondent

¶8

vs.

¶9

1)Victoria

¶10

2)Minor Nichol Deferin

¶11

3)Minor Terison 4)Minor Ricason (Monors 2 to 4 respondents rep. by their natural guardian/mother 1^st respondent Victoria) 5)Suseela ...Respondents 1 to 5/Claimants 6)Madusoothana Nair 7)G.Babu 8)Murugan 9)Suresh 10)The Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Anil Dhirubai Ambani Group Company Ltd., Tirunelveli. ... Respondents 6 to 10 /Respondents 1,2,4,5&6

¶12

Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award made in MCOP.No.295/2009 dated 29.04.2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum 1^st Additional Sub Judge, Nagercoil.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.K.Bhaskaran For R1 to R4 : Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja For R7 & R10 : No appearance R5 : Died

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

This appeal has been filed against the award made in MCOP.No.295/2009 dated 29.04.2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum 1^st Additional Sub Judge, Nagercoil.

¶18

2.In an accident which occurred on 26.10.2007, one Hercules Fernando died. Wife, children and mother of the deceased laid a claim in MCOP.No.295/2009 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum 1^st Additional Sub Judge, Nagercoil, claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. Resisting the claim petition, the appellant filed counter denying the manner of accident and the quantum of compensation claimed under various heads. Considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.8,17,000/- with 7.5% per annum from the date of claim. Aggrieved by the said award, the appellant has filed this appeal. Though the appellant filed this appeal challenging negligence and quantum, learned counsel for the appellant restricted his submission only to quantum of compensation.

¶19

3.Perusal of record shows that the respondents/claimants claimed that at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 48 years and earned Rs.9,000/- per month by working as a commission agent and doing business in fish. The Tribunal fixing the monthly income at Rs.6,000/-, deducting 1/3^rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased and applying '13' multiplier according to the age of the deceased, awarded compensation of Rs.6,24,000/- (Rs.6000x12-1/3x13). Apart from the above, the Tribunal awarded Rs.2,000/- towards transportation, Rs.1,000/- towards damage to clothes, Rs.10,000/towards funeral expenses, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.80,000/- towards loss of love and affection.

¶20

4.As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others (Special Leave Petition(Civil)No.25590 of 2014 dated 31.10.2017), no future prospects has been awarded. The 1^st respondent/wife of the deceased lost consortium of her husband at the young age of 37 years. Respondents 2 to 4 who were minor children aged 15, 13 and 10 respectively, at the time of accident, lost the love and affection, guidance and advice of their father at the young age. Therefore, in my considered opinion, since no future prospects has been awarded, it is a simple matter the award granted by the Tribunal is reasonable and it need not be interfered with.

¶21

5.The appellant is directed to deposit entire award amount with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, to the credit of the claim petition, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the major claimants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares with interest without filing any formal petition before the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribunal. The minors' share shall be deposited in a Nationalised Bank till the minors attain majority. After attaining majority, it

¶22

¶23

is for the minor claimants to withdraw their respective shares by making necessary application before the Tribunal discharging guardianship.

¶24

Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶26

/True copy/

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶28

¶29

The 1^st Additional Sub Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagercoil.

¶30

+1cc to Mr.K.Bhaskaran, Advocate, SR.No.73231.

¶31

+1cc to Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja, Advocate, SR.No.72979.

¶32

CMA(MD)No.1636 of 2013 16.07.2018

¶33

BALA

¶34

RAM/PN/SAR 2/31.07.2018/3P/4C

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The Oriental Insurance v. Vicotria, W/O Hercules

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance v. Vicotria, W/O Hercules

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director Vs Anjali Devi

T. Sathish Kannan Vs a. Dhanalakshmi

Lakshmi Vs M/S.Tamilnadu State Transport

Noor Faigira Begam, Vs O.M.Rameeja Beevi

Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd., Vs Muthusamy

The Oriental Insurance Company Vs Sulochana