Madras High Court
M/S.National Insurance Company ... vs P R A N A Y S E T H I And Oth E R S on 31 January, 2018
1
BE F O R E THE MADURAI BE N C H OF MADRA S HIGH COURT
DAT ED : 1 4. 0 2 . 2 0 1 9
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JU S T I C E K.KA L Y A N A S U N D A R A M
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS. J U S T I C E R.THARA NI
C.M.A(MD)No. 1 0 6 of 2 0 1 9
and
C.M.P.(MD)No. 1 2 0 1 of 2 0 1 9
M/s.National Insurance Company Limited,
Represented through its Divisional Manager,
7A, West Veli Street,
Madurai. ... Appellant/2nd respondent
.V s.
1.Vaishnudevi
2.Minor Pranav ... Respondents 1 & 2/
Petitioners
3.M.Ezhilukarasi
4.A.N.Jeyakodi
5.J.Sakunthala ... Respondents 3 to 4/
Respondents 1, 3 & 4
PRA Y E R : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgement and decree dated 31.01.2018
made in M.C.O.P.No.206 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, V Additional District Court, Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
For Appellant : Mr.J.S.Murali
For R1 : Mr.G.Murugan
For R4 & R5 : Mr.J.Alaguram Jothi
***
JUD GM E N T
This appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree passed in
M.C.O.P.No.206 of 2011, dated 31.01.2018, by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, V Additional District Judge, Madurai.
2.The brief facts of the case:-
On 05.02.2010, at about 08.45 p.m., the deceased was travelling in a
motor cycle bearing registration No.TN 06 G 0093, as a pillion rider in
Darmapuri to Salem main road. The motor cycle dashed against a car
bearing registration No.TN 30 A 8088 and in that process, the deceased fell
down and died on the spot. The legal heirs of the deceased filed the claim
petition seeking compensation of Rs.50,04,500/-, contending that the
accident had occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the car. The
claim is resisted by the appellant by filing a counter denying the manner of
accident and their liability.
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
3.Before the Tribunal, the claimants examined 3 witnesses and marked
Exs.P1 to P12 and on the side of the respondent, four witnesses were
examined and Exs.R1 to R6 were marked.
4.Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the
Tribunal came to the conclusion that the driver of the car was responsible
for the accident and awarded compensation of Rs.29,17,824/-. Challenging
the award, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant/Insurance
Company.
5.Mr.J.S.Murali, learned counsel for the appellant would argue that as
per the Motor Vehicle Rules, the rider of the motor cycle ought to have
given 10 meters distance and if that is followed, the accident would not
have taken place. It is further contended that the Tribunal has awarded a
sum of Rs.4,08,000/- towards conventional damages and as per the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NA T I O N A L IN SU R A N C E
CO M P A N Y LT D Vs. P R A N A Y S E T H I AND OTH E R S , reported
in 2 0 1 7 (2) TN M A C 6 0 9 (S C ) , the claimants are entitled only for a
sum of Rs.70,000/- under the head.
http://www.judis.nic.in
4
6.Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents/claimants would
argue that the first claimant lost her husband at her young age and the
second claimant is also a minor and hence, they are entitled for more
compensation for conventional damages.
7.The evidence of the claimants would clearly establish that the
accident had occurred only due to the negligence of the driver of the car
and hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the finding on the
negligence.
8.With regard to the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal, based
on the salary certificate and the age of the deceased, had arrived at a
compensation under the loss of dependency at Rs.37,64,736/- and after
deducting 1/3 towards his personal and living expenses, awarded a
compensation of Rs.25,09,824/-. The Hon'ble Apex Court in 2 0 0 9 (2) TN
M A C 1 (S C ) (S m t . S a r a l a V e r m a & Ors. Vs. Del h i Tr a n s p o r t
Co r p o r a t i o n & A n r ), has held that if the dependents are four in
number, 1/4 has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses.
Hence, by deducting 1/4, the claimants would be entitled for Rs.28,23,552/-
(Rs.37,64,736 – Rs.9,41,184). In respect of the compensation awarded
towards conventional damages, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
http://www.judis.nic.in
5
Court referred supra, the claimants are entitled only a sum of Rs.70,000/-.
Accordingly, the same is reduced from Rs.4,08,000/- to Rs.70,000/-.
9. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and
the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Additional District
Court, Madurai, is hereby modified. The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is reduced from Rs. 2 9 , 1 7 , 8 2 4/- to Rs. 2 8 , 9 3 , 5 5 2/- . The
appellant/Insurance Company shall deposit the modified award amount
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order. On such deposit being made, the major claimants are permitted to
withdraw their respective shares, as apportioned by the Tribunal, on making
out an appropriate application before the Tribunal. The share of the minor
shall be deposited in Indian Bank, High Court Branch, Madurai in a Fixed
Deposit scheme, till he attains majority. The mother of the minor claimant is
permitted to withdraw the interest of minor share once in three months for
the welfare of the minor. No costs. Consequently, connected Cicil
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.K.K. S . , J.] [R.T., J.]
1 4. 0 2 . 2 0 1 9
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
rj2
http://www.judis.nic.in
6
K.KA L Y A N A S U N D A R A M, J.
and R.THARA NI, J.
rj2 To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, V Additional District Court, Madurai.
C.M.A(MD)No. 1 0 6 of 2 0 1 9and C.M.P.(MD)No. 1 2 0 1 of 2 0 1 9 1 4. 0 2 . 2 0 1 9 http://www.judis.nic.in