Partly allowed

Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish v. Lakshmi

Madras HC21 Aug 2024CMA(MD)/542/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for four deceased persons and two injured minors in a motor vehicle accident. The Court reduced contributory negligence from 50% to 35% and increased compensation amounts due to inadequate notional income and future medical expenses.

What did the court decide?

Contributory negligence fixed at 35%. Compensation enhanced with additional amounts for future medical expenses and loss of income. Insurance Company directed to deposit enhanced sums with interest.

Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish Vs Lakshmi — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.08.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶7

Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish S/o.Kannan [represented through his mother and next guardian Veeralakshmi]

¶8

Minor Kaviya D/o.Balasubramanian [represented through her mother and next guardian Mariammal]

¶9

... Appellant in C.M.A.(MD) No.542/24

¶10

... Appellant in C.M.A.(MD) No.543/24

¶11

1.Veeralakshmi W/o.Kannan

¶12

2.Minor Muthukumar S/o.Kannan

¶13

3.Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish S/o.Kannan

¶14

[Minors second and third appellants are represented through their mother and next guardian Veeralakshmi, the first appellant]

¶15

... Appellants in C.M.A.(MD) No.544/24

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 1 of 21_

¶17

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶18

1.Lakshmi W/o.Chinnadurai

¶19

2.Chinnadurai S/o.Thalavai Moopanar

¶20

... Appellants in C.M.A.(MD) No.545/24

¶21

Vs.

¶22

1.Lakshmi W/o.Subbaiah

¶23

2.The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Through its Divisional Manager, No.41-B, First Floor, Victoria Street, Tuticorin - 628 215.

¶24

3.The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Through its Divisional Manager, No.84-A, Trivandrum Road, Palayamkottai.

¶25

... Respondents in all C.M.As.

¶26

Prayer in C.M.A.(MD) No.542 of 2024: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the quantum of compensation award to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- that apart from the amount of compensation already awarded in M.C.O.P.No.145 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, dated 29.08.2022.

¶27

Prayer in C.M.A.(MD) No.543 of 2024: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the quantum of compensation award to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/- that apart

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 2 of 21_

¶29

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶30

from the amount of compensation already awarded in M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, dated 29.08.2022.

¶31

Prayer in C.M.A.(MD) No.544 of 2024: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the quantum of compensation award to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/- that apart from the amount of compensation already awarded in M.C.O.P.No.147 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, dated 29.08.2022.

¶32

Prayer in C.M.A.(MD) No.545 of 2024: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to enhance the quantum of compensation award to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- that apart from the amount of compensation already awarded in M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, dated 29.08.2022.

¶33

For Appellant(s) in all C.M.As. : Mr.N.Ramamoorthy For R2 & R3 in all C.M.As. : Mr.A.Ilango

¶34

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

¶35

Since the instant appeals arise out of the claim petitions filed for the

¶36

death of the deceased and for the injured in the same accident and the

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 3 of 21_

¶38

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶39

Tribunal has passed the common award in all the claim petitions, these appeals are taken up together.

¶40

The instant appeals have been filed, seeking enhancement of

¶41

compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Subordinate Court), Tirunelveli, in the following claim petitions, vide its common award dated 29.08.2022:

¶42

Sl. C.M.A.(MD) No. M.C.O.P.No No.

¶43

1 C.M.A.(MD) No.542 of 2024 M.C.O.P.No.145 of 2021 2 C.M.A.(MD) No.543 of 2024 M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2021 3 C.M.A.(MD) No.544 of 2024 M.C.O.P.No.147 of 2021 4 C.M.A.(MD) No.545 of 2024 M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2021

¶44

The appellants in all C.M.As. filed the above claim petitions

¶45

before the Tribunal, stating that on 08.06.2020 at about 11.30 a.m., while the deceased Kannan, his two children, and another minor girl were traveling in his two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-75-T-6560, a car bearing Registration No.TN-69-AT-2252 owned by the first respondent and insured with the second respondent, Insurance Company, came in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the two-wheeler at the

¶46

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

¶47

Page No. 4 of 21

¶48

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶49

junction of the road, as a result of which the rider of the two-wheeler,

¶50

Kannan and the minor girl Makisha died and two other children, namely,

¶51

Kaviya and Manikandan alias Sabarish, sustained grievous injuries.

¶52

The first respondent, the owner of the car, filed a counter stating that the accident took place only due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the two-wheeler; that the car driver drove the vehicle in a careful manner; and that, in any case, the compensation claimed by the appellants/claimants was excessive.

¶53

The second and third respondents filed a common counter

¶54

denying the averments made in the claim petitions and stating that the rider of the two-wheeler caused the accident by crossing the road in violation of traffic rules and by carrying three pillion riders, and hence, they are not liable to pay any compensation.

¶55

The claimants examined four witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.4 on their side and marked Exs.P1 to P54. On the side of the respondents, two witnesses were examined as R.W.1 and R.W.2, and two documents were marked as Exs.R1 and R2. The Disability Certificate for the minor

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 5 of 21_

¶57

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶58

Manikandan [the appellant in C.M.A.(MD) No.542 of 2024] was marked as Ex.C1, and the Disability Certificate for the minor Kaviya [the appellant in C.M.A.(MD) No.543 of 2024] was marked as Ex.C2.

¶59

The Tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of both the driver of the car and the rider of the twowheeler, fixed 50% contributory negligence on the rider of the twowheeler, i.e., the deceased Kannan, and awarded the following compensation to the claimants:

¶60

*Sl.* No	*C.M.A.* *(MD) No.*	*M.C.O.P.* *No.*	*Awa*	*rd a*	*mount* *Remarks*
1	542/2024	145/2021	- (50%)	Rs. Rs. ----- Rs.	12,61,660 6,30,830 ------------- 6,30,830 For the injured minor Manikandan alias Sabarish
2	543/2024	146/2021	- (50%)	Rs. Rs. ----- Rs.	15,05,258 7,52,629 ------------- 7,52,629 For the injured minor Kaviya
3	544/2024	147/2021	- (50%)	Rs. Rs. ----- Rs.	14,76,944 7,38,472 ------------- 7,38,472 For the death of Kannan

¶61

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 6 of 21_

¶62

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶63

*Sl.*	*C.M.A.*	*M.C.O.P.*	*Award amount*	*Remarks*
No	*(MD) No.*	*No.*
4	545/2024	148/2021	Rs. 4,52,000 - (50%) Rs. 2,26,000 ------------------	For the death of the minor girl, Makisha
			Rs. 2,26,000

¶64

The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that

¶65

the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was inadequate; that the finding of the Tribunal fixing contributory negligence on the pillion riders of the two-wheeler is erroneous; and that hence, the compensation has to be enhanced.

¶66

Since the issue involved in the instant appeal is with regard to the

¶67

quantum of compensation payable by the second respondent, the notice to the first respondent is dispensed with.

¶68

The learned counsel for the second respondent, Insurance Company, per contra, submitted that the manner of the accident has been established through the rough sketch and the evidence of R.W.2, the driver of the car, which would suggest that the rider of the two-wheeler contributed to the accident by cutting across the road, and therefore, the

¶69

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 7 of 21_

¶70

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶71

contributory negligence fixed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable, and prayed for dismissal of these appeals.

¶72

This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the evidence on record.

¶73

The questions involved in the instant appeals are: (a) whether the Tribunal was right in fixing the contributory negligence on the rider of the two-wheeler at 50%; and (b) whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in all the claim petitions is just and reasonable.

¶74

As regards the first question, the appellants/claimants examined three witnesses. However, it is seen that P.W.1 and P.W.2 are not the eye witnesses. P.W.3, the father of the deceased minor girl, Makisha, stated that he witnessed the accident from a distance of 10 to 15 feet. However, he had not chosen to lodge the complaint. It is the case of the second respondent, Insurance Company, that four people travelled in the twowheeler, and one of the minor children was standing in the two-wheeler in front of the rider, and two other children were seated at the back of the two-wheeler. Even as per the claim petitions, the deceased rider has

¶75

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 8 of 21_

¶76

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶77

violated the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by taking three minor children dangerously positioned in the two-wheeler.

¶78

13.1. The respondents examined the driver of the car, who stated

¶79

that in order to avoid the routine check-up by the police, the rider of the two-wheeler suddenly cut across the main road in which the car was preceding at 70 km/h. However, it is seen that Ex.P1, FIR, was lodged against R.W.2. The claimants also marked Ex.P10, Final Report, which accuses the driver of the car of rash and negligent driving.

¶80

13.2. In the light of the evidence adduced on the side of the claimants and the respondents, this Court is of the view that both the rider of the two-wheeler and the car driver contributed to the accident. The evidence of P.W.3 and R.W.2 read together would lead to the irresistible conclusion that the rider of the two-wheeler has violated the law by taking three people in the two-wheeler and allowing a child to stand in front of him and has attempted to cut across the main road where the vehicles are expected to travel fast. At the same time, the driver of the car also ought to have been careful and slowed down the vehicle, especially at a junction of the road.

¶81

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 9 of 21_

¶82

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶83

13.3. Considering the fact that the car driver has also driven the

¶84

vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and that he was charged by the police for rash and negligent driving, this Court is of the view that the accident predominantly took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the car driver. Therefore, this Court is of the view that instead of apportioning the contributory negligence on the rider of the two-wheeler at 50% as held by the Tribunal, it would be just and reasonable to fix the contributory negligence on the rider of the two-wheeler at 35% for not only violating the law by taking three pillion riders but also for violating the traffic rules by cutting across the main road without any signal or warning. Therefore, 35% of the compensation is payable by the insurer of the two-wheeler.

¶85

13.4. Although the Tribunal has held that the respondents are jointly or severally liable to pay compensation, considering the fact that the second respondent is the insurer of the first respondent, this Court is of the view that the second respondent is liable to pay the compensation. Thus, Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

¶86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 10 of 21_

¶87

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶88

As regards the quantum of compensation, this Court deals with

¶89

each of the cases separately.

¶90

C.M.A.(MD) No.542 of 2024 - [M.C.O.P.No.145 of 2021]

¶91

15.1. This appeal pertains to the compensation awarded by the

¶92

Tribunal for the minor boy, Manikandan alias Sabarish. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.12,61,660/- to the minor appellant/injured claimant under the various heads. The learned counsel for the appellant was unable to point out any infirmity in the award of the Tribunal. However, taking into consideration the disability suffered by the minor claimant, this Court finds that the Tribunal ought to have awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/towards future medical expenses for the minor claimant as he has sustained a fracture and a steel plate was also fixed for treatment, which requires to be removed at a later point of time. Therefore, this Court awards a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards future medical expenses. The compensation under the other heads is just and reasonable and is therefore confirmed. Thus, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.13,61,660/- [Rs.12,61,660/- + Rs.1,00,000/-].

¶93

15.2. After deducting 35% towards contributory negligence fixed

¶94

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 11 of 21_

¶95

sum of

¶96

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶97

on the rider, the second respondent, Insurance Company, is liable to pay a

¶98

sum of Rs.8,85,079/- [13,61,660 - 4,76,581]. The second respondent, Insurance Company, is directed to deposit the aforesaid enhanced compensation of Rs.8,85,079/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, i.e., 18.01.2021, until the date of realization and costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

¶99

15.3. Since the appellant/injured claimant is a minor, the compensation amount is directed to be deposited in an interest-bearing fixed deposit [F.D.] in any nationalized bank until he attains majority. His mother/guardian of the appellant/injured claimant, Veeralakshmi, is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once every six months.

¶100

15.4. The appellant/claimant is directed to pay the necessary court fee, if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation.

¶101

C.M.A.(MD) No.543 of 2024 - [M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2021]

¶102

16.1. This appeal pertains to the compensation payable to the

¶103

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 12 of 21_

¶104

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶105

injured minor girl, Kaviya. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,05,258/- to the minor girl under the various heads. The learned counsel for the appellant was unable to point out any infirmity in the award of the Tribunal.

¶106

16.2. However, considering the nature of the injury suffered by the minor Kaviya, this Court finds that the Tribunal ought to have awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards future medical expenses. As admittedly, a steel plate and rods were fixed for the fracture suffered by her, the minor is liable to incur expenses for the removal of the said plate and rods. Hence, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded towards future medical expenses. The compensation under the other heads is just and reasonable and is therefore confirmed. Thus, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.16,05,258/- [Rs.15,05,258/- + Rs.1,00,000/-].

¶107

16.3. After deducting 35% contributory negligence, the second respondent, Insurance Company, is liable to pay a sum of Rs.10,43,417.70 [16,05,258.00 - 5,61,840.30], which is rounded off to Rs.10,43,418/-. The second respondent, Insurance Company, is directed to deposit the aforesaid enhanced compensation of Rs.10,43,418/- together with interest

¶108

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 13 of 21_

¶109

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶110

at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, i.e., 18.01.2021,

¶111

until the date of realization and costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

¶112

16.4. The appellant/injured claimant was 16 years old at the time of

¶113

filing the claim petition in 2021. She would have now attained the majority. Therefore, the appellant/injured claimant is directed to file a suitable application before the Tribunal, to record her majority, and to withdraw the compensation, along with interest and costs.

¶114

16.5. The appellant/claimant is directed to pay the necessary court fee, if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation.

¶115

C.M.A.(MD) No.544 of 2024 [M.C.O.P.No.147 of 2021]

¶116

17.1. This appeal pertains to the compensation awarded for the

¶117

death of the rider of the two-wheeler, namely, Kannan. The claimants examined the wife of the deceased as P.W.1 to establish that the deceased

¶118

was working as a tea master. However, no documentary evidence has been provided, to establish the income of the deceased. The deceased was

¶119

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 14 of 21_

¶120

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶121

42 years old and was taking care of his wife and two minor children at the

¶122

time of the accident. Considering the age of the deceased, his avocation, and the year of the accident, this Court is of the view that it would be just and reasonable to fix the notional income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/per month instead of Rs.10,000/- per month, fixed by the Tribunal. The compensation under the other heads is just and reasonable. Therefore, the compensation awarded under the head 'loss of income' is modified as follows:

¶123

Loss of Income:

¶124

Age of the deceased - 42 years

¶125

Notional Monthly Income - Rs.15,000/-

¶126

Annual Income [Rs.15,000 x 12] : Rs.1,80,000/-

¶127

Add: Future Prospects [Rs.1,80,000/- x 25/100] : Rs. 45,000/------------------: Rs.2,25,000/Less : Personal Expenses at 1/3^rd [2,25,000 x 1/3] * : Rs. 75,000/------------------: Rs.1,50,000/-

¶128

Applicable Multiplier – 14 [Rs.1,50,000/- x 14] - Rs.21,00,000/-

¶129

[* since there are three dependents of the deceased ]

¶130

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 15 of 21_

¶131

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶132

17.2. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified

¶133

as follows:

¶134

*Sl.* No	*Heads*	*Amount* *awarded by* *the Tribunal*	*Amount* *awarded by* *this Court*	*Award* *confirmed,* *enhanced or* *granted*
1	Loss of Income	Rs.13,99,944/-	Rs.21,00,000/-	Enhanced
2	Loss of Consortium to the wife	Rs. 44,000/-	Rs. 44,000/-	Confirmed
3	Loss of Estate	Rs. 16,500/-	Rs. 16,500/-	Confirmed
4	Funeral Expenses	Rs. 16,500/-	Rs. 16,500/-	Confirmed
	Total	Rs.14,76,944/-	Rs.21,77,000/-	Enhanced by Rs.7,00,056/-

¶135

17.3. After deducting 35% contributory negligence, the second respondent, Insurance Company, is liable to pay a sum of Rs.14,15,050/- [21,77,000 - 7,61,950]. The second respondent, Insurance Company, is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.14,15,050/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, i.e., 18.01.2021, until the date of realization and costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

¶136

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 16 of 21_

¶137

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶138

17.4. On such a deposit, the claimants are entitled to the compensation as per the apportionment fixed by the Tribunal.

¶139

17.5. The first appellant/first claimant is permitted to withdraw her

¶140

share, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, by filing a suitable application before the Tribunal.

¶141

17.6. Since the second and third appellants/second and third claimants are minors, their shares are directed to be deposited in an interest-bearing fixed deposit [F.D.] in any nationalized bank until they attain a majority. The first respondent/first claimant is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once every six months.

¶142

17.7. The appellants/claimants are directed to pay the necessary

¶143

court fee, if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation.

¶144

C.M.A.(MD) No.545 of 2024 [M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2021]

¶145

18.1. The appeal pertains to the compensation awarded for the death

¶146

of the minor girl, Makisha, who was 7 years old at the time of the accident. The compensation under the heads 'loss of estate' and 'funeral

¶147

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 17 of 21_

¶148

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶149

expenses' is just and reasonable and is confirmed.

¶150

18.2. However, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.44,000/- towards the parental consortium, which is meagre. Both the appellants/claimants, who are the parents of the deceased minor girl, are entitled to the consortium at the rate of Rs.44,000/- each. Hence, the compensation under the head 'parental consortium' is enhanced to Rs.88,000/-.

¶151

18.3 As regards the compensation under the head 'loss of income', this Court finds that the Tribunal has fixed the notional income of the deceased minor girl at Rs.25,000/- per annum, which is also meagre. In similar circumstances, this Court has adopted a sum of Rs.60,000/per annum for the minors. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it would be just and reasonable to fix the income at Rs.60,000/- per annum. The multiplier applicable is 15 for the minors. Thus, the compensation under the head 'loss of income' has to be fixed at Rs.9,00,000/- [60,000 x 15]. The total compensation is enhanced in the following manner:

¶152

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 18 of 21_

¶153

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶154

*Sl.* No	*Heads*	*Amount* *awarded by* *the Tribunal*	*Amount* *awarded by* *this Court*	*Award* *confirmed,* *enhanced or* *granted*
1	Loss of Income	Rs.3,75,000/-	Rs.9,00,000/-	Enhanced
2	Loss of Estate	Rs. 16,500/-	Rs. 16,500/-	Confirmed
3	Funeral Expenses	Rs. 16,500/-	Rs. 16,500/-	Confirmed
4	Parental Consortium	Rs. 44,000/-	Rs. 88,000/-	Enhanced
	Total	Rs.4,52,044/-	Rs.10,21,000/-	Enhanced by Rs.5,68,956/-

¶155

18.4 After deducting 35% contributory negligence, the second

¶156

respondent, Insurance Company, is liable to pay a sum of Rs.6,63,650/- [10,21,000 - 3,57,350]. The second respondent, Insurance Company, is directed to deposit the aforesaid enhanced compensation of Rs.6,63,650/together with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, i.e., 18.01.2021, until the date of realization and costs, after deducting the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

¶157

18.5 For the sake of convenience, this Court reiterates that the claimant in C.M.A.(MD) No.542 of 2024 - [M.C.O.P.No.145 of 2021] is entitled to Rs.8,85,079/- , the claimant in C.M.A.(MD) No.543 of 2024 - [M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2021] is entitled to Rs.10,43,418/- , the claimants in C.M.A.(MD)No.544 of 2024 [M.C.O.P.No.147 of 2021] are entitled to

¶158

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

¶159

Page No. 19 of 21

¶160

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶161

Rs.14,15,050/- and the claimants in C.M.A.(MD)No.545 of 2024

¶162

[M.C.O.P.No.148 of 2021] are entitled to Rs.6,63,650/-.

¶163

18.6 On the deposits made by the second respondent as aforesaid,

¶164

the appellants/claimants are permitted to withdraw the same, as per the apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, by filing a suitable application before the Tribunal.

¶165

18.7 The appellants/claimants are directed to pay the necessary

¶166

court fee, if any, for the enhanced amount of compensation.

¶167

In the result, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are partly

¶168

allowed. No costs.

¶169

21.08.2024

¶170

Index: Yes/ No Neutral Citation: Yes / No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order JEN To:

¶171

1.The Special Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶172

2.The Section Officer,

¶173

V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras high Court, Madurai.

¶174

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 20 of 21_

¶175

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶176

SUNDER MOHAN , J.

¶177

JEN

¶178

C.M.A.(MD) Nos.542 to 545 of 2024

¶179

21.08.2024

¶180

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ______________ Page No. 21 of 21_

Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish v. Lakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minor Manikandan alias Sabarish v. Lakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Kanaga Vs Masanamoorthy

The Managing Director Vs Minor Bhakyalakshmi (Aged 15)

Branch Manager Vs S.Arun

Mohammed Ismail Vs Shri.Ambika Chit Funds

The Managing Director Vs Subramanian

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Dindigul Limited, Vs Deivam