Tamil Nadu State Transport … vs Sampooranam on 27 November, 2008

Madras High Court
Tamil Nadu State Transport … vs Sampooranam on 27 November, 2008




DATED:27.11. 2008


			   Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR	

C.M.A.No.1363 of 2003
C.M.P.No.9165   of 2003

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore-Division No.II) Ltd.  
Rep. By its Managing director,
Chennimalai Road, Erode.2                                                .. Appellant


1. Sampooranam
3. Parameswari (Minor)
    rep. By mother and natural
    guardian R.1
4. Ganesan                                                                   ..  Respondents
	   Appeal filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 21.07.2000 in MCOP No.474 of 1996 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,(Sub Court), Sankakiri.
					     . . . 
		For Appellant              : Mr. P.Jagadeeswaran

		For respondents	      : Mr. N.Manoharan
					      . . . 

					J U D G M E N T								

The Transport Corporation has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 21.07.2000 made in M.C.O.P.No.474 of 1996 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Court) Sankakiri.

2. It is a case of injury. The accident in this case happened on 05.09.1996. The deceased Murugesan, aged bout 49 years, a Power-Loom Maistry was getting down from the bus at the bus stop. Without noticing that, the conductor blew the whistle and the driver started the bus suddenly, due to which, the deceased was thrown out of the bus and was run over and he died. The wife aged 45 years, two daughters, aged 21 and 16 years, filed a claim petition for compensation in a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- stating that the income of the deceased was Rs.3,000/- per month.

3. In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1 and one Mani, eye witness was examined as P.W.2. Documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.5. Ex.P.1 is the copy of First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector’s report. Ex.P.3 is the copy of the charge sheet. Ex.P.4 is the copy of the Post mortem Certificate. Ex.P.5 is the legal heir Certificate. No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal.

4. The Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.65/- per day and deducted Rs.15/- towards personal expenses of the deceased and the contribution of the deceased to the family was taken as Rs.50/- per day. The number of working days was taken as 25. The monthly income was arrived at Rs.1,250/- and by adopting multiplier of 12, the Tribunal fixed the total pecuniary loss as Rs.1,80,000/- (i.e. Rs.1250 X 12 x 12 = Rs.1,80,000/- The Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering, since the deceased died three days after the accident. The Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with 12% interest.


Amount granted by
the Tribunal.

Pecuniary Loss
Rs.      1,80,000/-
Loss of consortium
Rs.         15,000/-
Loss of love and affection to the 2 childlren
Rs .        10,000/-   
Pain & Suffering of the deceased
Rs.         10,000/-
Funeral expenses 
Rs.           5,000/- 

Rs       2,20,000/-

5. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the quantum of compensation has to be reduced as the multiplier is higher. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:

The income taken as Rs.1,250/- per month is very meagre. Therefore, even if the multiplier is marginally higher, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal can be accepted as just, as the higher multiplier will compensate for the lower income taken. The other amounts are not in dispute and are confirmed. The interest at the rate of 12%, is confirmed since the accident happened in the year 1996 and the award was passed in the year 2000.

6. Finding no merits , this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the entire amount has already been deposited. The The claimants will be entitled to withdraw the same as per the order of the Tribunal.

Internet:yes 							 27.11.2008

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Sub court,



						                CMA No. 1363  of 2003


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *