C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 31.12.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI
C.M.A.(MD)No.151 of 2022
1.Indira
2.Ranjeethkumar
3.Chandrakala
4.Sivasankari. ... Appellants/Petitioners
vs.
1.Anthonijashmin
2.The Branch Manager,
Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
Ramanathapuram Branch, KTM Kasim Center,
477/46, 2nd floor, 36, Salai Street,
Ramanathapuram. ...
Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1973, against judgment and decree dated
22.07.2021 passed in M.C.O.P.No.735 of 2019 on the file of the
Mahila Court, Pudukottai.
For appellants : Mr.S.K.Mani
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
For Respondents
for R1 : No appearance
for R2 : Mr.C.Jawahar Ravindran
*****
J U D G M E N T
Not being satisfied with the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.735
of 2019 dated 22.07.2021 by the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal/Mahila Court, Pudukottai, the legal heirs of the deceased
Pasupathi have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal for
enhancement of compensation.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the
appellants and the second respondent and perused the relevant
records.
3. The manner, in which the accident had occurred, is not in
dispute.
4. Upon consideration, the Tribunal has passed an award for
a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. For loss of love
and affection, Rs.1,25,000/-, for transport expenses, an amount of
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 2 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
Rs.10,000/- and for funeral expenses, an amount of Rs.15,000/-
was granted by the Tribunal.
5. It was stated by the claimants side that the deceased
Pasupathi, who was aged about 60 years, was a pensioner as he
was a retired Inspector of Police and was receiving monthly
pension of Rs.23,000/-. Besides that, he was working as
Supervisor in a private concern and earning a sum of Rs.17,000/-
p.m. To prove his income, his wife/P.W.1 Tmt.Indira and his
son/P.W.2 Mr.Ranjith kumar were examined. The Tribunal did not
grant any amount under the head loss of dependency on the
ground that
a. the evidence of P.W.1/wife of the deceased
reveals that now, she has been receiving pension of Rs.
23,000/- p.m. and when her husband was alive, the same
amount was being received by him as pension.
b. the evidence of P.W.2/Ranjith kumar, who is
none other than the son of the deceased to the effect that
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 3 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
he was running an Advertising services, a partnership firm
in the name and style of 'Dharshan Advertising Services'.
Ex.P12 is the attendance register of his firm. Ex.P10 is the
salary certificate issued to the deceased by the advertising
company, which is being run by P.W.2/son of the deceased.
However, in Ex.P10/salary certificate, it is mentioned as
compensation of Rs.10,000/-. As P.W.2 did not produce any
evidence to show that he is the owner of the advertising
company, these details were not accepted by the Tribunal.
6. It is relevant to note that in the claim petition, it has been
mentioned that the deceased was working in a private company in
the capacity of Supervisor and earning monthly income of Rs.
17,000/- p.m. Based on the testimony of P.W.2 coupled with
Exs.P10 and P12, the Tribunal has rejected the said fact. This
Court does not find any good reason to disturb the finding of the
Tribunal.
7. Though P.W.1/wife of the deceased would state that her
husband was receiving monthly pension of Rs.23,000/-, on a
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 4 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
careful perusal of the colour photo copy of the authorisation for
pension issued to P.W.1 (Ex.P9), it appears that he received an
amount of Rs.2,84,983/- as commuted value of pension on
08.06.2016 and the reduced pension was Rs.5,675/-. From
Ex.P12/authorisation for pension, it is deducible that the deceased
was receiving the monthly pension of Rs.5,675/- p.m., The
deceased retired from service on 30.04.2016. As per Aadhar card
of the deceased/Ex.P8 his date of birth is 21.04.1958. Based on
the aforesaid records, at the relevant point of time, his age is safely
fixed as 60 years. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Sarala Varma -vs- Delhi Transport Corporation and
,
another, reported in 2009(2) TNMAC 1 (SC) the proper multiplier to
be applied is '9'. For deduction of personal and living expenses, if
the number of dependants/family members are 4 in number, ¼ has
to be deducted. For computing loss of dependency, the following
formula emerges:
Rs.5,675/- - ¼ x 12 x 9 = Rs.4,59,648/-.
8. The Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- for
loss of love and affection. As the claimants are four in number, who
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 5 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
are the legal heirs of the deceased Pasupathi, for loss of
consortium, an amount of Rs.35,000/- is granted in addition to the
amount already awarded by the Tribunal. For loss of estate, an
amount of Rs.15,000/- is granted. As regards other
heads, the compensation granted by the Tribunal appears to be
reasonable and acceptable and needs no interference. The
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reworked and tabulated
hereunder:
S. Description Amount Amount Award
No awarded by awarded by confirmed
Tribunal this Court or
enhanced
or granted
or reduced
For loss of love and Rs.1,25,000/- Rs.1,60,000/- Enhanced
affection and for loss of
1 consortium
2 For transport expenses Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- Confirmed
3 For funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- Confirmed
4 For loss of dependency --- Rs.4,59,648/- Granted
5 For loss of estate --- Rs. 15,000/- Granted
Total Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.6,59,648/-
Rounded off Rs.6,60,000/-
9. In the result,
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 6 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
(i) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands partly allowed. No
costs.
(ii) The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced
from Rs.1,50,000/- to Rs.6,60,000/-.
(iii) The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation amount i.e., Rs.6,60,000/-
(less the amount already deposited if any) along with interest @
7.5% p.a. from the date of accident till the date of realisation, to the
credit of M.C.O.P.No.735 of 2019 on the file of Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal/Mahila Court, Pudukottai, within a period of eight
(8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
(iv) On such deposit being made, the first appellant/wife of
the deceased is entitled to Rs.5,10,000/- and the appellants 2 to 4
are entitled to Rs.50,000/- each. The Claimants/appellants are
permitted to withdraw their share amount, as per the apportionment
fixed, after adjusting the amount, if any already withdrawn, by filing
necessary application before the Tribunal.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 7 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
(v) The claimants/appellants are directed to pay the Court fee
for the enhanced compensation amount.
(vi) The Tribunal below shall disburse the amount upon
production of the certified copy showing proof of payment of Court
fee by the claimant.
31.12.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
apd
To
1.The Sessions Judge,
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Mahila Court,
Pudukottai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
R.KALAIMATHI,J
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 8 of 9
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
apd
Pre-delivery order made in
C.M.A.(MD) No.151 of 2022
31.12.2024
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 9 of 9