IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 3.11.2008 CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.1155 of 2008 and M.P. No. 1 of 2008 ............ The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Salem Division.I. .. Appellant/ 2nd respondent Vs. 1. Chinnapponnu 2. Minor Tandapani (2nd respondent is rep. by next friend mother Chinnapponnu) 3. G. Venkateswaran ... respondents/ petitioners Appeal filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 2.3.2007 in MCOP No. 162 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Sangagiri. For Appellant : Mrs. B. Vijayalakshmi For Respondents : Mr. N. Manoharan -------- JUDGMENT
Transport Corporation has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 2.3.2007 in MCOP No. 162 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Sangagiri.
2. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 17.3.2006. The deceased Suresh, aged 20 years, working as a Lath Operator, was travelling as a pillion rider when he was hit by the appellant transport corporation bus. In that accident, the said Suresh suffered serious injuries and died. The mother aged 40 years and brother aged 16 years have filed the claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation stating that the income of the deceased Suresh was Rs.6,000/- p.m.
3. In support of the claim petition, the mother was examined as P.W.2. Documents Exs. A1 to A11 were marked. One Jegannatha Pillai was examined as R.W.1. and no document was filed on behalf of the appellant/ respondent before the Tribunal.
4. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus and the liability of the appellant to compensate the claimants is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant and the same is confirmed.
5. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the quantum of compensation in the case of death of a 20 years old bachelor earning member is on the higher side and has to be reduced.
6. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the same was decided by the Tribunal in paragraph No. 7 in answer to point No.2. The Tribunal, in the absence of any proof for the income, fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.2,750/- p.m. of which, 1/3rd was deducted towards personal expenses and the contribution to the dependents was taken as Rs.1,835/- p.m. and the annual contribution was fixed at Rs.22,260/-. As per Ex.P2, post mortem certificate, the age of the deceased was taken as 21. The Tribunal adopted 17 multiplier and granted a sum of Rs. 3,78,340/- as pecuniary loss to the dependents. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amount as compensation.
Sl.No
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
1
Loss of pecuniary benefits
Rs.3,74,340/-
2 Transport expenses Rs. 2,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 2,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection Rs. 6,000/- Total Rs.3,84,340/-
7. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Bijoy Kumar Dugar – vs. – Bidya Dhar Dutta reported in 2006 AIR SCW 1116 = 2006 (3) SCC 242 and stated that the deceased was a bachelor earning member and the compensation has to be reduced as the Tribunal adopted higher multiplier for granting the compensation.
8. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand submitted that in the event of the Court interfering with the quantum of compensation, particularly the multiplier adopted, substantial compensation for loss of love and affection to the mother and younger brother should be given.
9. The deceased in this case was 20 years and working as a lath operator. The age and the income of the deceased are not in dispute and there is no evidence to support the actual income. As contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the multiplier taken in this case has to be reduced since the possibility of the deceased getting married and the contribution to the dependents getting reduced is always there. In such view of the matter, the multiplier is reduced to 12 as against 17 and the loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents would be Rs.2,64,240/- (Rs.22,020/- x 12 = Rs.2,64,240/-) The claimants are entitled to compensation for loss of love and affection. The mother of the deceased is entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- and brother is entitled to Rs.10,0000/- towards loss of love and affection. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows:-
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
Amount granted by this Court
1
Loss of pecuniary benefits
Rs.3,74,340/-
Rs.2,64,240/-
2 Transport expenses Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 2,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 2,000/- Rs. 2,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection Rs. 6,000/- Rs. 30,000/- Total Rs.3,84,340/- Rs.2,98,240/-
10. Since the accident happened in the year 2006 and the award was passed in the year 2007, the interest granted by the Tribunal at 7.5% stands confirmed.
11. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed as follows:-
(i) The award of the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.2,98,240/- from Rs.3,84,340/-
(ii)The interest of 7.5% awarded by the Tribunal is confirmed.
(iii) It is stated that entire amount has been deposited as per the order dated 2.4.2008. Out of the award amount of Rs.2,98,240/-, the first claimant/mother is entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with interest and costs. The second claimant minor brother is entitled to Rs.98,240/- with interest.
(iv) The share of the minor 2nd respondent/2nd claimant shall be invested in any nationalised bank proximate to the place of the residence of the first respondent/first claimant for a period of three years and renewable thereafter till the minor attains majority. The mother of the minor first respondent is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest in respect of the share of the minor once in three months directly from the bank and for the said purpose the first respondent/first claimant shall open a savings bank account on the same branch and the interest amount shall be transferred to the account to be maintained by the mother.
(v) The nationalised bank to which the amount will be deposited, shall intimate to the first respondent/first claimant of such deposit and confirm the same to the Tribunal that the first claimant has been duly informed. The Tribunal to inform the bank accordingly.
(vi) Since the deposit is in the case of minor, the Tribunal is directed to send a report containing the details of the deposit to the High Court on such deposit.
(vi) The appellant is entitled to withdraw the excess amount in deposit after settling the claimants.
(vii) There will be no order as to cost.
(ix) Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
3.11.2008
ra
Index: Yes/ No
Internet: Yes/No
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
(Sub Court), Sangagiri.
R. SUDHAKAR,J.,
CMA No. 1155 of 2008
Date: 3.11.2008