This civil miscellaneous appeal challenged the quantum of compensation awarded in a motor accident death claim. The High Court accepted the claimants' appeal, increasing the monthly income used for calculation and granting additional heads of damages, enhancing the total award.
Compensation enhanced from Rs.13,50,000/- to Rs.26,24,200/- with interest at 7.5% p.a.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 11.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
1/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award dated 14.11.2018 passed in M.C.O.P.No.47 of 2016 on the file of the Subordinate Judge-cumMotor Accident Claims Tribunal, Padmanabhapuram.
For Appellants : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar For R1 : Mr.V.Kannan For R2 : No appearance For R5 : Mr.A.S.Mathialagan
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN.J.]
Being aggrieved over the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Sub-Court, Padmanabhapuram in M.C.O.P.No.47 of 2016, dated 14.11.2018, the claimants have filed the present appeal “for enhancement of compensation”.
2/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
2.The appellants/claimants filed claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.
47/2016, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Sub-Court, Padmanabhapuram claiming a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) for the death of one Jinish Hetmet, who is the husband of the first appellant, father of the second appellant and son of the appellants 3 & 4 in the accident that occurred on 20.10.2015. By the order, dated 14.11.2018, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) as compensation.
2.1.The first respondent is the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-01-N-4910, the second respondent is the owner-cuminsurer of the said vehicle and the third respondent is the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No.TN-18-K-6939. The fourth respondent is the owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-18-K-6939.
3.Facts of the Case:-
According to the appellants, on 20.10.2015 at about 09.20 p.m., the deceased along with other passengers were travelling in a TNSETC bus bearing registration No.TN-01-N.4910 from Chennai to Nagercoil. When 3/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
the bus was nearing Irungaloor Opposite of SRM Medical College at 9.20 p.m., the first respondent drove his bus in a rash and negligent manner without following the traffic rules and regulation and hit the third respondent's lorry bearing Registration No.TN-18-K-6939. The third respondent also had parked the said vehicle in the No parking area without following the signals and other required formalities. The first respondent's vehicle violently hit the lorry and the deceased sustained multiple injuries. The neighbours of that places brought the deceased to KAPV Medical College Hospital, Tiruchirappalli. The doctor informed that he was dead. The jurisdictional police filed the First Information Report in Cr.No.521 of 20215 under Section 304A IPC against the first respondent and after investigating the matter, the police filed the final report against the driver of the insured vehicle.
4.The respondents 1, 3 & 5 filed the counter statement and denied
all the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the accident did not occur due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the insured bus. The claim is excessive and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
4/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
was examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P17 were marked. On the side of the
respondents R.W.1 was examined and Ex.R1 was marked.
6.Finding of the Tribunal:
The Tribunal, considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, Ex.P1 FIR and arguments of the counsel for the claimants and the respondents held that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent. The said vehicle belongs to the second respondent and hence, directed the second respondent to pay a sum of Rs.13,50,000/-(Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) as compensation. The Tribunal awarded the compensation of Rs.13,50,000/-
to the claimants under the following heads:-
| Sl. | Heads | Amount in Rupees |
|---|---|---|
| No. | ||
| 1 | Loss of Income | Rs.12,80,000/- |
| 2 | Loss of Love and Affection | Rs. 40,000/- |
| 3 | Funeral Expenses | Rs. 15,000/- |
| 4 | Loss of Estate | Rs. 15,000/- |
| Total | Rs.13,50,000/- |
The appellants have filed the appeal for enhancement of compensation.
5/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
7.Submission of the learned counsel for the appellants:
The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that deceased was working as a pharmacist in M/s.Mens Shana Pharmacy, T.Nagar, Chennai and Accounts Executive in Maruthi Agencies, Chennai. He was getting a salary of Rs.40,000/- per month. The Tribunal failed to consider Ex.A7, Ex.A8, Ex.A10 and Ex.A11 to Ex.A17 and has wrongly fixed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/-. The tribunal wrongly deducted 1/3rd for his personal expenses instead of 1/4th since 4 members are dependants. Hence, the appellants sought for enhancement of compensation.
8.Submission of the learned counsel for the second respondent:
The learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that the tribunal has rightly taken the income of the deceased and awarded compensation and no interference is required and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. The third and fourth respondents are the driver and owner of the insured lorry respectively and they were set ex-parte before the tribunal. Since the insurance company had not challenged the liability and quantum, their presence is not necessary to decide the entitlement of the 6/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
higher compensation and therefore, this Court accepts the memo filed by the appellants to dispense with the notice.
9.We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants
and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and also perused all the materials available on record.
11.1.Whether the appellants are entitled to enhancement of compensation?.
12.Discussion on quantum:
Accoridng to the appellant, deceased was working as pharamacist in maruthi agency. He completed his diploma in pharmacy course and registered in the pharmacy council and the registeration certificate was marked as Ex.P11 and also he completed diploma in office automation and the certificate was marked as Ex.P.10. Further he was working as a pharmacist in maruthi agency and also Mens Sana Pharmacy and the 7/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
salary certificate issued by them were marked as Ex.P7 and P8. Inspite of that, the tribunal has fixed monthly income of deceased as Rs.10,000/only. At the time of the accident, deceased died leaving his 7 months old baby. Considering the salary certificate and education qualification, this court inclines to increase the monthly salary of the deceased from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs.12,000/- to meet the ends of justice and to arrive the just compensation. Therefore, this Court is inclined to increase the monthly income of the deceased from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.12,000/-.
12.1.Calculation of the amount: (i) monthly income = Rs.12,000/(ii) Add : 40% future prospects Rs.12,000 +Rs.4,800/-( 40/100) = Rs.16,800/(iii) Less: Personal expenses 1/4 Rs.16,800/- (-) Rs.4,200 = Rs.12,600/(iv) Annual Income Rs.12,600/- X 12 = Rs.1,51,200/(v) Multiplier Rs.1,51,200/- x 16 = Rs.24,19,200/(vi) Loss of Income = Rs.24,19,200/- 8/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
12.2.In addition to that, the tribunal has not granted any amount for consortium and loss of love and affection. Therefore, this Court as per
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of (National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi) , reported in 2017(2) TNMAC 609(SC) , grants a sum of Rs.40,000/- as consortium to the wife of the deceased. The claimants 2 to 4 are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of love and affection. The tribunal has not granted any amount for transport expenses. Therefore, this Court is inclined to grant a sum of Rs.15,000/- for transportation.
13. Conclusion:
In the light of the above said discussion, claimants would be entitled to claim the following amounts as compensation under the
various heads enumerated hereunder:
| Sl. No. |
Heads | Amount awarded by the Tribunal (in Rupees) |
Re-quantified amount by this Court (in Rupees) |
Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loss of Income | 12,80,000/- | 24,19,200/- | Enhanced |
| 2 | Loss of love and affection to the claimants 2 to 4 (40,000 x 3) |
40,000/- | 1,20,000/- | Enhanced |
| 3 | Funeral Expenses | 15,000/- | 15,000/- | confirmed |
9/12
4
5
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
| 4 | Loss of Estate | 15,000/- | 15,000/- | confirmed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Loss of Consortium to the wife |
40,000/- | Granted | |
| 6 | Loss of Transportation | 15,000/- | Granted | |
| Total | Rs.13,50,000/- | Rs.26,24,200/- | Enhanced |
and compensation awarded in M.C.O.P.No.47 of 2016 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram, dated 14.11.2018 is here by enhanced from Rs.13,50,000/- to Rs.26,24,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a.from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.
15.Apportionment:
The second respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced award amount, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The claimants are entitled to receive the following compensation amount.
| Claimants | Amount(in Rupees) |
|---|---|
| Anusha/wife of the deceased | 15,74,520/- |
| Minor Jina/ daughter of the deceased | 5,24,840/- |
| Gabriel/father of the deceased | 2,62,420/- |
| Alphonse Mary/mother of the deceased | 2,62,420/- |
| Total | Rs.26,24,200/- |
10/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
(V.B.S.J.,) (K.K.R.K.J.,) 11.03.2024 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No am/ sbn
To
11/12
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN.J., and K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN.J.,
am/ sbn
C.M.A(MD)No.410 of 2021
11.03.2024
12/12
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants are entitled to enhancement of compensation?
Whether the monthly income of the deceased should be re-quantified based on salary certificates?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay SethiRelied on¶76
2017(2) TNMAC 609(SC)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Anusha
Minor Jina
Gabriel
Alphonse Mary
Jebasingh
M/s.BL Transports Private Ltd.
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN and K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
Parties & counsel
