Appeal by insurance company challenging compensation quantum for motor accident death. Court upheld Tribunal's quantum of Rs.47,06,000 based on salary evidence and affirmed Rs.1 lakh for love and affection, dismissing the appeal.
Appeal dismissed; compensation quantum maintained at Rs.47,06,000 plus interest.
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.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 04.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
C.M.A(MD)No.489 of 2020 and
C.M.P(MD)No.5389 of 2020
M/s.HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited, 4th Floor, Rajanarayanan Towers, No.70, Race Course Road, Coimbatore.
... Appellant/2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.J.Durgadevi 2.Minor J.Kanishka 3.Minor J.Varshini ...Respondents 1to3/Petitioners 1to3 4.A.Saravanaprabhu ...4th Respondents/1st Respondent (Minors rep. by natural guardian mother Durgadevi, first respondent herein)
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the decree and judgment dated 24.09.2018 passed in MCOP No.298 of 2016, by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Principal District Judge, Karur.
For Appellant : M/s.N.Shyllappa Kalyan For R1 & R3 : M/s.K.Balasubramani ****
J U D G M E N T
DR G. JAYACHANDRAN,J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J.
This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company being aggrieved by the quantum fixed by the Tribunal as compensation for the untimely death of one Janarthanan in the motor accident.
2.The brief facts, leading to the filing of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, are as follows: (i) On 29.04.2016, while the deceased Janarthanan was riding a motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-28-AW-2092 near Karur to Salem bypass road from east to west, at that time, the first respondent's lorry bearing Registration No.TN-02-C-5049 was driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. Due to which, the deceased Janarthanan died on the spot. At the time of accident, the deceased was 38 years old and he was working as a Manager in the hotel viz., 'South Indian Residency' at Vellore and earning a sum of Rs.24,000/- per month.
(ii) The second respondent filed a counter affidavit before the Tribunal stating that there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and only on the negligent driving of the driver of the two wheeler, the accident had occurred.
(iii) The claim petition has been preferred by the wife, two minor children and father of the deceased for a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation.
grounds:
(i)The acceptance of the Salary Certificate-Ex.P.7 is questioned stating that there is no material to show that the deceased was paid a salary of Rs.24,000/- and except the salary certificate, there is no proof of genuineness and no proof of payment of salary like Bank statement or Income Tax returns.
(ii) Secondly, it is contended that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards love and affection, is contrary to the dictum laid down in Pranay Sethi case. The Tribunal ought to have awarded only Rs.40,000/- towards love and affection.
the testimony of Ex.B.3 cannot be suspected and is reliable. The view of the Tribunal based on the evidence needs no interference.
income, this Court finds as a Manager for Catering, he was also provided with lodging. Therefore, the trial Court though fixed monthly salary as Rs.24,000/-, had deducted ¼ for the personal expenses of the deceased though the employer has taken care of food and shelter. Therefore, this Court could not find any infirmity in the determination of monthly salary of the deceased.
8.For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum fixed by the Tribunal. Hence, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(G.J.,J.) (C.K.,J.) 04.01.2024
NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Ns
DR G. JAYACHANDRAN,J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J. Ns
To
C.M.A(MD)No.489 of 2020 and C.M.P(MD)No.5389 of 2020
04.01.2024
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the compensation quantum fixed by the Tribunal based on the salary certificate.
Whether the award of Rs.1,00,000 towards love and affection is contrary to the dictum laid down in the Pranay Sethi judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi and othersApplied¶22
National Insurance Co. Ltd-vs-Pranay Sethi and others, 2017 ACJ 2700
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.HDFC ERGO General Insurance Company Limited
J.Durgadevi
J.Kanishka
J.Varshini
Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran
Justice C.Kumarappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
