Allowed

Valarmathi v. the Managing Director

Madras HC28 Mar 2024CMA/2064/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil miscellaneous appeal sought enhancement of compensation in a motor accident claim. The High Court enhanced the pecuniary loss from Rs.4,63,000 to Rs.7,56,000 by reassessing the monthly income and applying a multiplier of 7, while confirming the non-pecuniary head awards, totaling Rs.8,41,000.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.4,63,000 to Rs.8,41,000. Respondent Corporation directed to deposit amount with 7.5% per annum interest to the Tribunal within 12 weeks.

Valarmathi Vs the Managing Director — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Reserved on Pronounced on 12.03.2024 28.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN

¶6

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶7

1.Valarmathi W/o.G.Rajaarman @ Rajaram

¶8

2.R.Latchumanan S/o.G.Rajaarman @ Rajaram

¶9

3.V.Pasamalar W/o.Velavan

¶10

4.R.Karhtikeyan S/o.G.Rajaarman @ Rajaram

¶11

5.K.Sangumalar W/o.Kotpulichozhan Petitioners all are permanently residing at Thaikal Main Road, Karikuppam Pudukuppam, C Pudupettai, Bhuvanagiri Taluk Now residing at Main Road, Alapakkam and Post Cuddalore Taluk. ... Appellants

¶12

Vs.

¶13

The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (VPM Divn.I) Ltd.,

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/8

¶16

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶17

No.3/137, Salademu, Vazhuthareddy Post Villupuram 605 401.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree in MCOP.No.1949 of 2018 dated 27.04.2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/1 st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore.

¶20

For Appellants : Ms.Ramya V Rao

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.C.R.Suresh Kumar

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

The Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Decree in MCOP.No.1949 of 2018 dated 27.04.2021 on the file of the Motor Accident

¶24

Claims Tribunal/1 st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore.

¶25

2.The claim Petitioners are the Appellants herein and they filed this Appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in MCOP.No.1949 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/1 st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

¶26

2/8

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶29

3.The legal representatives of the deceased G.Rajaraman @ Rajaram filed MCOP.No.1949 of 2018 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/1 st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, seeking compensation and filed this Appeal on the point of quantum.

¶30

4.The factum of the accident, manner of the accident, rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the Respondent's vehicle are not under challenge in this Appeal. Accordingly, the finding rendered by the trial Court that the accident taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Respondent's vehicle is hereby confirmed.

¶31

5.During the trial, on the side of the claim Petitioners, PW1 & PW2 were examined & Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 were marked and on the side of the Respondents, RW1 was examined and Ex.R1 was marked.

¶32

6.Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the claim Petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Transport Corporation.

¶33

3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶35

7.The Transport Corporation has neither filed any Appeal challenging the finding rendered by the Tribunal as to the rash and negligence nor file any Cross Objection Petition.

¶36

8.In this Appeal, the only point for consideration is quantum. As per Ex.P.4/Post mortem certificate, the deceased was aged about 65 years at the time of the accident and hence as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma & Others .Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another, reported in 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 (SC), right multiplier is “7” for the age of the deceased .

¶37

9.The Tribunal has fixed the monthly income at Rs.6,000/-. As per the Division Bench's judgment of this Court in the case of Andal & Others Vs. Avinav Kannan and others reported in 2019(1) TNMAC 54 (DB) , the notional income comes to Rs.13,302/- (Rs.6500 x 264/129). Hence, I am inclined to fix the income at Rs.12,000/- per month. Since the deceased is self employed and he is aged about 65 years at the time of the accident, the question of future prospects does not arise. The number of family members of the deceased is 5

¶38

4/8

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶41

and therefore, ¼ th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore, the pecuniary loss sustained by the claim Petitioners are re-assessed as follows:

¶42

Rs.12,000/- x 12 x 7 x ¾ = Rs.7,56,000/-

¶43

10.The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and affection, a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transport expenses and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses, which are just and proper and the same are hereby confirmed.

¶44

S.No.	Head	Amount (Rs.)
1	Pecuniaryloss	756000
2	Loss of consortium	40000
3	Loss Love and affection	25000
4	Funeral expenses	10000
5	Transportation	10000
	Total Compensation	841000

¶45

In total, the claim Petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.8,41,000/- (Rupees

¶46

eight lakh and forty one thousand only) and the interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 7.5% per annum is also confirmed.

¶47

5/8

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶50

11.In fine,

¶51

(i) this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed, enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,63,000/- to Rs. 8,41,000/ - to the extent indicated above. No Costs.

¶52

(ii) the Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount, with 7.5% interest per annum and costs before the Tribunal, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶53

(iii) on such deposit being made, all the claim Petitioners/Appellants are entitled to get their share in the enhanced award amount, as per the ratio of apportionment made by the Tribunal. The claim Petitioners are permitted to withdraw their entire share with proportionate interest and costs, less the award amount already withdrawn, if any, by filing necessary application before the Tribunal.

¶54

(iv) the claim Petitioners are directed to pay the court fee, if any, for the

¶55

6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶57

enhanced compensation amount and the Registry is directed to draft the decree only after the receipt of Court fee.

¶58

28.03.2024

¶59

Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order sai To The 1 st Additional District & Sessions Judge Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Cuddalore.

¶60

7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶62

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN.J,

¶63

sai

¶64

Pre-delivery Judgment made in

¶65

C.M.A.No.2064 of 2021

¶66

Dated: 28.03.2024

¶67

8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Valarmathi v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valarmathi v. the Managing Director

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

Saranya Vs M. Karthikeyan

M.Sathishkumar Vs D.Vinothkumar

Radha Vs Balakrishnan

Ambika Vs Proodle Hospitality Services (P) Pt

C.Govindaraj Vs C.Kuppammal

C.Vinayagamoorthy Vs a.Vijayarani