Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Rajangam on 13 April, 2018
Author: M.Duraiswamy
Bench: M.Duraiswamy
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 13.04.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
C.M.A(MD)No.1417 of 2007
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2017
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.,
Tirunelveli Region,
Tirunelveli. ... Appellant / Respondent
Vs.
1.Rajangam
2.R.Susila
3.R.Jeyaprakash
4.R.Lingeswari
5.R.Sumithra
6.R.Pirabhu ... Respondents/Petitioners
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.169
of 2003, dated 20.10.2004, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Additional Subordinate Court, Thenkasi.
!For Appellant :M/s Rajnish Pathiyil
^For Respondents :No Appearance
:JUDGMENT
Challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.169 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Court, Thenkasi, the Transport Corporation has filed the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The respondents/claimants filed M.C.O.P.No.169 of 2003, claiming a total compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) for the death of one Nainar Selvam. The respondents 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased, the respondents 3 and 6 are his brothers and the respondents 4 and 5 are his sisters. Admittedly, the deceased Nainar Selvam had died as a bachelor and he was aged about 27 years at the time of accident.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal only in respect of the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, more particularly the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal. Further the learned Counsel fairly submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards the loss of estate and towards the future prospects.
4. As per the law laid down in Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, the proper multiplier to be adopted in respect of the deceased, who was aged about 27 years at the time of accident, is ?17?. The Tribunal had erroneously adopted ?18? as multiplier.
5. According to the Tribunal, the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.3,000/-p.m., at the time of accident. However, no amount was added to his monthly income, towards future prospects. Therefore, applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court, 40% should be added towards future prospects and if it is added, it comes to Rs.4,200/-(Rupees Four Thousand and Two Hundred only)(Rs.3000/-+Rs.1200/-). Since the deceased had died as a bachelor, a sum of Rs.2,100/-(Rupees Two Thousand One Hundred only) should be taken as contribution to the family.
6. The Tribunal had awarded only a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) towards funeral expenses. As per the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017(2) TN MAC 609 (SC), the dependents are entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) towards funeral expenses. Further a sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) is awarded towards loss of estate, as the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of estate. In these circumstances, adopting ?17? as multiplier, the total loss of earning comes to Rs.4,28,400/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Four Hundred only)(Rs.2,100/- x17x12). By applying the ratio laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017(2) TN MAC 609 (SC), the dependents are not entitled for compensation under the head of loss of love and affection. Therefore, the award of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of love and affection is set aside. If a sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) and a further sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) are added, the total compensation comes to a sum of Rs.4,58,400/-(Rupees Four Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand Four Hundred only). The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,50,000/-(Rupees Five lakhs Fifty Thousand Only), without applying proper multiplier. In these circumstances, the award of Rs.5,50,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to a sum of Rs.4,58,000/-(Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifty Eight Thousand only). In other aspects, the award passed by the Tribunal remains unaltered.
7. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional Subordinate Court, Thenkasi.
2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
.