IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.12. 2008
CORAM:-
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR
C.M.A.No.4070 of 2008
and
M.P.No.1 of 2008
The Branch Manager,
National insurance Co. Ltd.,
Nethaji Road,
Manjakuppam,
Cuddalore.1. .. Appellant
Vs.
1. Indhirani
2. Chandraleka
3. Manoj (Minor)
4. Mathumitha(Minor)
5. Baratha (Minor)
(Minors 3 to 5 rep. By their mother
guardian 2nd respondent Chanraleka)
6. S.Sivasubramanian
7. S.Arul
8. The Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Company,
Arcotwoodlands Complex,
Cuddalore .. Respondents
. . .
Appeal filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 20.07.2006 made in M.C.O.P No.1126 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge) Cuddalore.
. . .
For Appellant : Mr.D.BAskaran
For respondents : Mr.. . .
. . .
J U D G M E N T
The Insurance Company has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 20.07.2006 made in M.C.O.P No.1126 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Principal District Judge) Cuddalore.
2. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 09.04.2005. The deceased Mani @ Manivelan, aged 35 years, a Carpenter, was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing registration No.TN-31-E-4644 and insured with the 8th respondent from Thambipettai to Nellikuppam. When the said autorickshaw was proceeding along Cuddalore to Chidambaram Main road, a private bus belonging to the 6th respondent and insured with the appellant came from the opposite direction driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the autorickshaw. In that accident, the said Mani suffered grievous injuries and died. The mother aged 40 years, wife aged 24 years, two minor sons, aged,5,and 3 years and one minor daughter aged 4 years filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- stating that the income of the deceased was Rs.4,500/- per month working as a Carpenter.
3. In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1, one Dakshinamurthy, employer of the deceased was examined as P.W.2 and one Subash, eye witness was examined as P.W.3. Documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.11. Ex.P.1 is the copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 copy of the Motor Vehicle Inspector’s inspection report. Ex.P.3 is the Post mortem Certificate. Ex.P.4 is the copy of the Insurance Policy of the offending bus. Ex.P.5 is the Driving Licence of the driver of the offending bus. Ex.P.6 is the copy of R.C.Book of the bus.Ex.P.7 is the Records sheets of the deceased. Ex.P.8 is the Member card of the deceased issued by the President of Tamil Nadu Construction Workers Central Union,Chennai. Ex.P.9 is the hospital report. Ex.P.10 is the Member card of Dakshinamoorthy, employer of the deceased. Ex.P.11 is the copy of the driving licence of P.W.3, eye witness. No oral or documentary evidence was let on the side of the appellant/2nd respondent before the Tribunal.
4. The finding of the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending bus who is responsible for the accident and caused the death and the liability fixed on the appellant- insurance Company, to compensate the claimants is not seriously disputed in this appeal and hence, the same is confirmed.
5. In the Appeal, the only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation. The Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,250/- per month and after deducting 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased, by adopting 16 multiplier, granted a sum of Rs.4,16,000/- (i.e.Rs.3,250 X 12=Rs.39,000/- – 13,000/- = Rs.26,000/- X 16 = Rs.4,16,000/-) towards pecuniary loss. The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5% :
Sl.No.
Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Pecuniary Loss Rs. 4,16,000/- 2. Loss of consortium to the wife, Rs. 10,000/- 3 Loss of love and affection RS. 10,000/- 4. Loss to the Estate Rs. 2,500/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 2 000/- Total Rs. 4,40,500/-
6. In appeal, it is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the multiplier of 16 adopted by the Tribunal on the death of 33 years old Carpenter is on the higher side.
7. Learned counsel for the claimants, on the other hand, stated that meagre amount has been granted towards loss of love and affection and loss of consortium and justified the Award.
8. On going through the award, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the compensation granted by the Tribunal for the following reasons:
i. The deceased 33 years old, Carpenter was supporting his family consisting of a wife, three minor children and mother. The employer was examined as P.W.2 to state about the income of the deceased claimed at Rs.4,500/- per month. Since the accident in his case happened in the year 2005, considering the minimum wages and the living wages of the persons like that of the deceased, the Tribunal should have fixed the income atleast at Rs.4,500/- as claimed by the claimants. On the contrary, the said income of the deceased was taken as Rs.3,250/- by the Tribunal. Since the income of the deceased is fixed at Rs.3,250/- per month only, the higher multiplier of 16 will compensate for the lesser income taken in this case.
ii. The amounts granted towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection are also marginally lower as there are three minor children and a mother. They have to be properly compensated for the loss of love and affection, ont eh death of the deceased and they are entitled to a further sum of Rs.10,000/-.
iii. Considering all these, the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal is justified as also the interest at 7.5% as the accident happened in the year 2005 and the award was passed in the year 2007.
9. Finding no merits, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
Learned counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks’ time to deposit the entire award amount and is allowed. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same except the minors as per the order of the Tribunal.
PAL
To
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Principal District Judge,
Cuddalore