Partly allowed

Bhavani @ Sathiyabhavani v. Vijayakumar

Madras HC5 Mar 2024CMA/442/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced the compensation awarded in a motor accident claim. The Court increased the notional income multiplier and added awards for transportation and loss of consortium, raising the total to Rs. 18,94,400.

What did the court decide?

Award enhanced from Rs. 13,40,472 to Rs. 18,94,400; respondent directed to deposit balance with interest; delay in appeal interest waived.

Bhavani @ Sathiyabhavani Vs Vijayakumar — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 05.03.2024

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶7

Bhavani @ Sathiyabhavani

...Appellant

1.Vijayakumar

2.Divisional Manager,

¶12

The United India Insurance Company Ltd., No.46, Katpadi Road, Vellore.

Chinnammal (died)

... Respondents

Prayer:

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the award against the judgment and decree dated 18.06.2018 and made in MACTOP.No.982 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Spl Sub Court, Thiruvannamalai.

¶17

1/7

¶18

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

¶19

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal vide the decree and judgment dated 18.06.2018 and made in MACTOP.No.982 of 2013.

¶22

The learned counsel for the claimant would submit that on 11.10.2012, when one Manogaran was traveling in the Mini bus bearing Registration No.TN-32-N-0083 as a passenger at Ambalavarkattalai to Sundakudi Main

¶23

road, due to the rash and negligent driving of the Mini Bus driver, he was thrown out of the bus and back wheel of the bus had ran over him, due to which he was died on the spot. Considering all the aspects, the Tribunal had awarded

¶24

the compensation in the following manner:

¶25

*S.No*	*Heads*		*Compensation (Rs.)*
1	Loss of Income		13,10,472
2	Loss of Estate		15,000
3	Funeral Expenses		15,000
		Total	13,40,472

¶26

2/7

¶27

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

¶28

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶29

He would submit that at the time of accident, the deceased was working as an agricultural worker-cum-auto driver. Without considering the said aspect, only a sum of Rs.6,500/- was fixed by the Tribunal as notional income of the deceased and the same is too low. Hence, he request this Court to re-determine the same. Further, he would fairly submit that since the compensation awarded under the other heads are just and fair, the same may be confirmed.

¶30

Ms.R.Sree Vidhya, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the 2^nd respondent and would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and hence, he requests this Court to confirm the same.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

¶32

In the present case, the only issue that has to be decided is with regard

¶33

3/7

¶34

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

¶35

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶36

to the quantum of compensation. The accident was occurred in the year 2012.

¶37

At the time of accident, the deceased was working as a Farmer-cum-Auto

¶38

Driver, for which the Tribunal fixed the notional income as a sum of Rs.6,500/-, which appears to be too low. Hence, considering the year of accident, age and avocation of the deceased and the cost inflation, this Court feels that it would be appropriate to fix a sum of Rs.9,000/- as notional income of the deceased. Hence, by adding 40% towards future prospects and by applying 18 as multiplier and also by deducting 1/3^rd towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the loss of income would be calculated as follows:

¶39

Rs.9,000/- (notional income) + Rs.3,600/- (40% future prospects) * 18 (multiplier) * 12 (month) * 2/3 (deduction towards personal expenses) = Rs.18,14,400/-

¶40

Further, since no amount was awarded towards Transportation and Loss of Consortium, this Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.10,000/towards Transportation and a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards Loss of Consortium.

¶41

Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as follows:

¶42

4/7

¶43

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

¶44

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶45

S.No.
1

¶46

*S.No.*	*Heads*	*Compensation* *awarded by Tribunal* *(Rs.)*	*Compensation* *awarded by this* *Court (Rs.)*
1	Loss of Income	13,10,472	18,14,400
2	Loss of Estate	15,000	15,000
3	Funeral Expenses	15,000	15,000
4	Loss of Consortium	Nil	40,000
5	Transportation	Nil	10,000
	Total	13,40,472	18,94,400

¶47

Therefore, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is modified as a sum of Rs.18,94,400/-. Accordingly, the award amount stands enhanced from a sum of Rs.13,40,472/- to Rs.18,94,400/-. In all other aspects, the award of the Tribunal stands confirmed.

¶48

In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and the 2^nd respondent is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.18,94,400/- along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit of MACTOP.No.982 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Spl Sub Court, Thiruvannamalai. Further, as per the order dated 13.02.2024, the 2^nd respondent shall not pay any interest for the delayed period of 1265 days in

¶49

5/7

¶50

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

¶51

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶52

filing the present appeal. Upon such deposit, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the award amount to respective bank accounts of the claimants, by way of RTGS, within a period of three weeks from the deposit and receipt of the Bank details obtained from the claimant. No costs.

¶53

05.03.2024

¶54

Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order nsa

¶55

6/7

¶56

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

¶57

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶58

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY,J.

¶59

nsa

¶60

C.M.A.No.442 of 2024

¶61

05.03.2024

¶62

7/7

¶63

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

Bhavani @ Sathiyabhavani v. Vijayakumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavani @ Sathiyabhavani v. Vijayakumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumudha Vs Kumaran

Harini (Minor) Vs Pooja Malhotra

The Manager Vs Chinnasamy

P. Karthikeyan Vs K. Kumaresan

Samalammal Vs v. Mohan

Ms. Brownbird Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs Equitas Small Finance Bank Ltd.