Madras High Court
S.V.Priya vs K.Jayaraman (Died) on 10 March, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 MAD 307
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-03-2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A. No.1843 of 2015
1.S.V.Priya
2.K.P.Reshma (Minor)
3.Y.Kuppa Naidu
4.K.Bakialakshmi .. Appellants/Petitioners
Vs.
1.K.Jayaraman (Died)
2.The New India Insurance Company Ltd.,
80, Arcot Road,
Porur,
Chennai-600 116.
3.Kuppusamy .. Respondents/Respondents
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 173 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the fair and decreetal dated
04.03.2013 passed in M.C.O.P.No.3385 of 2010 on the file of the learned
XVII Additional District and Sessions Judge, XVII Additional District and
Sessions Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai.
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015
For Appellants : Mr.S.Udhayakumar
For Respondent-2 : Mr.J.Chandran
JUDGMENT
The appellants./claimants filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation mainly on the ground that the Tribunal failed to award future prospects resulted in granting of lesser compensation than that of the compensation for which the claimants are legally entitled.
2. The accident occurred on 26.03.2008 at about 09.30 A.M. at Paruthipattu Bridge, near Avadi and the deceased Krishnakumar, who was aged about 30 years, at the time of accident, died on the spot and his legal heirs namely, the first claimant is the wife, second claimant is the minor children and the third and fourth claimants are the parents.
3. On account of the sudden death of the deceased in the accident, the entire family lost their livelihood, as the deceased was the sole breadwinner of the family. This apart, the deceased, at the time of accident, was aged about 30 years and therefore, the Tribunal ought to have granted 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015 future prospects as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The appellants/claimants filed Income Tax assessment as the deceased was an Assessee. Though such factors were considered by the Tribunal, no compensation was awarded for future prospects. Thus, the claimants are constrained to file the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent/New India Insurance Company could not able to raise serious objections in view of the fact that award of future prospects as contemplated in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and in the present case, the deceased, who was aged about 30 years at the time of accident and the claimants are the dependents, then there is no reason to deny the benefit of future prospects along with the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal.
5. Thus, this Court is not inclined to go into the other details in view of the fact that the factum regarding the accident was not disputed and the coverage of policy was also established through documents and the 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015 quantum of compensation was also granted in accordance with the procedures and the only lacuna found in the judgment and decree is that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for future prospects and this Court is inclined to add compensation for future prospects, which is to be granted 40% taking into account of the income of the deceased. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.7,14,400/- is to be awarded towards 40% future prospects. Thus total compensation awarded by the Tribunal comes to Rs.22,40,150/- now enhanced to Rs.25,80,400/-. The compensation payable to the claimants are Rs.25,80,400/-.
The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount with accrued interest, including the enhanced compensation along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, if not already deposited and on such deposit, the appellants/ claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount as per the apportionment granted by the Tribunal, except the minor, by filing an appropriate application. The payments are to be made only through RTGS. 4/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015 The appellants/claimants are liable to pay additional Court Fee for the enhanced compensation.
Accordingly, the Award dated 4.3.2013 passed by the Tribunal in MCOP No.3385 of 2010 is set aside and consequently, C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015 stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
10-03-2020 Index : Yes/No. Internet: Yes/No. Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Svn S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn 5/6 http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.1843 of 2015 To
1.The XVII Additional District and Sessions Judge, XVII Additional District and Sessions Court-cum- Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai.
2.The New India Insurance Company Ltd., 80, Arcot Road, Porur, Chennai-600 116.
CMA No.1843 of 2015
10-03-2020 6/6 http://www.judis.nic.in