Madras High Court
United India Insurance Co., Ltd. And ... vs K.V.Md. Ayisha Ummal And Ors. on 30 October, 1986
Equivalent citations: (1987)2MLJ172
JUDGMENT Sengottuvelan, J.
1. These two civil miscellaneous appeals, No. 455 of1982 by the Insurance Co. and No. 807of 1983 by the owner of the vehicle, arise out of an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madras,in O.P 703 of 1980 on its file. The facts of the case are briefly as follows.
2. One P.M.A. Ahmed Jamaluddin, aged 42 years, a businessman, was riding his scooter TMS 9198 from west to east along Poonamallee High Road, at about 3-45 p.m. on 8.11.1980; the lorry, bearing Regn. No. TMK 1547, belonging to one Madanagopal, and having been insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., came at a high speed from east to west on the wrong side of the road and dashed against the scooter, as a result of which the scooterist was knocked down and made to sustain multiple grievous head injuries. He ultimately died in the General Hospital, on 13.11.1980 while under treatment.
3. The first petitioner before the Tribunal is the mother of the deceased, the second petitioner is the wife and petitioners 3 to 6 are the minor children of late Jamaluddin. The Tribunal after considering the evidence let in came to the conclusion that the deceased met with his death due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry. The said finding is not canvassed before us.
4. The only question raised before us for consideration is that the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal is on the high side. Taking into account the fact that the deceased would be able to spare out of his earnings only to an extent of Rs. 500 per month for the maintenance of his defendants/petitioner, herein and adopting the multiplier as 16-1/2, the Tribunal arrived at the total loss of income to the dependants as Rs. 99,000 but restricted the compensation to Rs. 75,000 giving allowance towards imponderables that may happen in the life of the deceased and also taking into account the fact that the payment of compensation is made in a lump sum. In addition to the compensation of Rs. 75,000 towards loss of pecuniary benefits, the Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 500 towards transport charges. In so far as the earning aspect of the deceased is concerned, the evidence before the Tribunal is that the deceased was contributing a sum of Rs. 500, per month for the household expenses. This part of the evidence is also not seriously challenged. The only attack by the appellants would be that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal at 16-1/2 was rather too high when the age of the deceased was taken into consideration. The deceased was aged 42 years at the time of his death. The age of the petitioner's mother and wife are respectively 65 and 35. While determining the multiplier, the average age of his life expectancy of this country is to be given more credence than considering the age of the mother of the deceased, who at the age of 65 years is alive. Taking into account the life expectancy of both the deceased, and the petitioners the ends of justice would be met if we adopt the multiplier as 10 instead of 16-1/2. On this basis, the compensation payable to the petitioners works out to Rs. 60,000, but the same will have to be restricted to Rs. 50,000 after giving allowance for any imponderables that may happen in the life of the deceased and also taking note of the fact that the compensation is paid in lump sum.
5. Learned Counsel for the claimants would contend that the apportionment of compensation amounts requires reconsideration. This contention carries some weight since the mother and the widow are given a very low amount, which is inconsistent to the shares to which they are entitled under law. Accordingly the modified compensation amount of Rs. 50,000 plus the sum of Rs. 500 awarded by the Tribunal towards transport charges, which is hereby confirmed, totalling to Rs. 50,500 is apportioned in the following manner : The mother of the deceased is entitled to receive Rs. 2,500, the wife of the deceased is entitled to get Rs. 7,500 plus Rs. 500 towards transport charges and the four minor children are entitled to get Rs. 10,000 each, on their attaining majority. Till the minors attain majority, as directed by the Tribunal, their shares will lie in bank deposit.
6. In the result C.M.A. No. 455 of 1982 filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed since the Company is liable to pay compensation as per the contract and C.M.A.No.807 of 1983 filed by the owner of the vehicle is modified to the extent indicated in the body of the judgment. There will be no order as to costs.