IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.1.2009 CORAM:- The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A. No. 2513 of 2008 ........ The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Kumbakonam. .. Appellant/ respondent Vs. 1. Radhakrishnan 2. Selvalakshmi 3. Muthuraman 4. Minor Murugananthan 5. Minor Parthiban (4th & 5th petitioners are rep. by their father and guardian Radhakrishnan) .. Respondents/Petitioners Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V. Act against the award and decree dated 13.1.2005 made in MCOP No. 920 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Court) Chidambaram. For Appellant : Mr. S. Arunkumar For Respondents: Mr. V.K. Rajagopalan R1 No Appearance R2 ------ JUDGMENT
The Transport Corporation has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 13.1.2005 made in MCOP No. 920 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Court) Chidambaram.
2. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 27.4.2002. The deceased Venkatesan, aged 25 years, was walking on the road when he was hit by the appellant transport corporation bus and in that accident, he died. The father aged 55 years, mother aged 40 years, brother aged 20 years and two minor brothers aged 17 years and 14 years filed the claim for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation stating that the income of the deceased was Rs.3,000/- p.m.
3. In support of the claim, the father of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. One Senthil Kumar, the eye witness, was examined as P.W.2. One Kumaravelu was examined as P.W.3 and Ragunathan, owner of the lottery agency, was examined as P.W.4. Documents Exs. A1 to A8 were marked. No oral and documentary evidence was let in 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 transport corporation to compensate the claimant is not in dispute and the same is confirmed.
5. As regards the compensation, the Tribunal based on the oral and documentary evidence, fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.2083/- p.m. equivalent to Rs.25,000/- p.a. of which Rs.5,000/- was deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and by adopting 17 multiplier, determined the loss of pecuniary benefits in a sum of Rs.3,40,000/-. ( Rs.20,000/- x 17 = Rs.3,40,000/-) In addition, the Tribunal granted compensation on conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amount as compensation with interest at the rate of 9% p.a.
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
1
Loss of pecuniary benefits
Rs. 3,40,000/-
2 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- 3 Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection Rs. 20,000/- Total Rs.3,70,000/-
6. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the 17 multiplier is on the higher side and therefore, the quantum of compensation has to be reduced.
7. Learned counsel for the claimants on the other hand pleaded that the quantum of compensation is just and reasonable and need not be reduced.
8. The deceased in this case is a bachelor earning member. The income at the time of death in the year 2002, has been fixed as Rs.2,083/- whereas, the living wage will be slightly more. The deceased was working as a lottery ticket salesman and his income is supported by the evidence of P.W.4 employer and the salary certificate Ex.A5. He was working as a lottery ticket salesman at Chidambaram municipal town.
9. Keeping in mind the reasons enumerated in the Apex Court decision in Bijoy kumar Dugar Vs. – Bidya Dhar Dutta reported in (2006 AIR SCW 1116 = 2006 (3) SCC 242), the multiplier of 17 cannot be justified. However, considering the period of accident, age and occupation of the deceased, the income in this case has to be reasonably fixed at Rs.3,000/- as claimed by the claimants. The Tribunal erred in deducting further sum of Rs.5,000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased when the total income fixed is very low. Therefore, the compensation granted for loss of pecuniary benefits has to be properly re-fixed. The income of the deceased, who died in the year 2002, as claimed can be fixed at Rs.3,000/- p.m. and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, the contribution to the family is fixed as Rs.2,000/- p.m. equivalent to Rs.24,000/- p.a. Following the Apex Court decision in Bijoy Kumar’s case 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. Therefore, the multiplier is reduced to 13 as against 17 and the loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents will be Rs.3,12,000/- (Rs.24,000/- x 13 = Rs.3,12,000/-) Other amounts granted under conventional heads are not in dispute and they are confirmed. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal stands modified as follows:-
Sl.No.
Head
Amount granted by the Tribunal
Amount granted by this Court
1
Loss of pecuniary benefits
Rs. 3,40,000/-
Rs.3,12,000/-
2 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 3 Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 20,000/- Total Rs.3,70,000/- Rs.3,42,000/-
10. The appellant has not raised an issue with regard to the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the interest granted by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. 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.3,42,000/- from Rs.3,70,000/-.
(ii) The interest granted by the Tribunal at 9% stands confirmed.
(iii) Learned counsel for the appellant stated that entire award amount has been deposited as per the order of this Court dated 18.8.2008.
(iv) Out of the award amount, claimant/mother is entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs.96,000/- with interest and entire costs. claimant/father is entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs.96,000/- with interest and third claimant/brother is entitled to withdraw a sum of Rs.50,000/- with interest. 4th and 5th claimants/ minor brothers are entitled to Rs.50,000/- each with interest.
(v) The share of the minors 4th and 5th respondents/ 4th and 5th claimants shall be invested in any nationalised bank proximate to the place of the residence of the respondent/claimant for a period of three years and renewable thereafter till the minors attain majority. The mother of the minors is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest in respect of the share of the minors once in three months directly from the bank and for the said purpose the respondent/claimant mother 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.
(vi) The nationalised bank to which the amount will be deposited, shall intimate to the respondent/claimant of such deposit and confirm the same to the Tribunal that the claimant has been duly informed. The Tribunal to instruct the bank accordingly.
(vii) 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.
(viii) There shall be no order as to costs.
(ix) Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Ra 05.1.2009 Index: No Internet: Yes To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Additional District Court) Chidambaram. R. SUDHAKAR,J., CMA No. 2513 of 2008 Date: 05.1.2009