Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
R. BANUMATHI & S. VIMALA
United India Insurance Company Limited
Versus
B. Padmavathy & Others
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1543 of 2005
Decided On :Decided on: 05-01-2012
Motor Accident - Compensation - M.C.O.P.NO.2791 of 2001 - Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974, Section 163A - The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 166 - The Second Schedule to M.V. Act - The Supreme Court's decision in Sarla Verma case [2009 ACJ 1298]
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a road traffic accident resulting in the death of a Mathematics teacher. The claimants alleged negligent driving of a light goods vehicle, while the insurance company denied responsibility and challenged the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the deceased's salary and income from tuition, future prospects, and multiplier for loss of dependency. It found the compensation awarded by the Tribunal excessive and reduced it to Rs. 28,04,800, payable with interest at 9% per annum.
Issues: (1) Whether the compensation for 'loss of dependency' and 'future prospects' is just and reasonable? (2) What is the just and reasonable compensation to be awarded to the Claimants?
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles from the Supreme Court's decision in Sarla Verma case to calculate future prospects and loss of dependency, considering the deceased's salary, income from tuition, and multiplier for age. It also emphasized the need for standardizing the addition for future prospects and deduction towards personal expenses.
Final Decision: The compensation awarded by the Tribunal was reduced to Rs. 28,04,800, payable with interest at 9% per annum. The insurance company was directed to deposit the balance compensation within eight weeks.
R.BANUMATHI,J
1. Challenge in this appeal is the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court No.IV, Chennai in M.C.O.P.NO.2791 of 2001 awarding compensation of Rs.35,12,000/-for the death of a Mathematics teacher - Late R.Ravi in road traffic accident on 08.11.2000.
2. On 8.11.2000, at 5.30 p.m at Poonamallee High Road in Maduravoil opposite to Petrol Bunk run by a Cooperative Society, the deceased was proceeding in his motor cycle - T.V.S.Suzuki bearing Regn.No.TN-20A 350 with his colleague Krishnamurthy [PW3] as a pillion rider. The Motor cycle was proceeding from east to west. At that time, light goods vehicle bearing Regn.No.KA-01 -8506 came in the opposite direction i.e., west to east in Poonamallee High Road and came to the southern side of the road and hit against the motorcycle. Due to the accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he was immediately taken to Government General Hospital, Chennai, where he was declared dead. Regarding the accident, a criminal case was registered against the van driver in Crime No.1404 of 2000 of E4, Maduravoil Police Station. At the time of accident, the deceased was employed as a Mathematics teacher at Chinmaya Vidhyalaya School, Virugambakkam, Chennai -92 and was earning a salary of Rs.10,108/- per month. Alleging that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the light goods vehicle, wife, daughter and mother of deceased Ravi have filed the Claim Petition claiming compensation of Rs.60,70,932/-.
3. Denying the negligent driving of light goods vehicle, the Appellant-Insurance Company has filed counter contending that the alleged accident occurred only due to the negligent riding of the motor cycle and that the driver of the goods vehicle was not responsible for the alleged accident. Appellant-Insurance Company also denied the age of the deceased and also the salary which he was earning as teacher and his alleged income from tuition. Contending that the accident was due to the negligence of the deceased, who was riding the motor cycle, the Appellant-Insurance Company prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.
4. Before the Tribunal, the 1st Claimant wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. Manager of Chinmaya Vidhyalaya School was examined as P.W.2. Krishnamurthy, who was pillion rider in the motor cycle was examined as P.W.3. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced by the Appellant-Insurance Company.
5. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence and with reference to evidence of P.W.3 - eyewitness, the Tribunal held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-01 - 8506. Based upon Ex.P8-salary certificate and evidence of P.W.2, the Tribunal has taken the salary of the deceased at Rs.10,000/-. Based upon the evidence of P.W.1 and Ex.P17Income-tax return (31.3.2001), the Tribunal has observed that the deceased Ravi was earning around Rs.1,55,000/- per annum from tuition and has taken his income from tuition at Rs.10,000/- per month. Taking the total income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/-per month (Rs.10,000/- from salary and Rs.10,000/- from tuition) and after deducting one-third for personal expenses, taken the income of deceased at Rs.13,400/- per month. Based on the age of the deceased and also age of 1st Claimant and adopting the multiplier "17", the Tribunal has calculated the loss of dependency at Rs.27,33,000/-. For future prospects and inflation, Tribunal has awarded Rs.7,14,000/- and adding the conventional damages, awarded total compensation of Rs.35,12,000/-, the details of which are as under:
Loss of dependency: Rs.27,33,600.00
(Rs.13,400/- x 12 x 17)
Future Prospects: Rs. 7,14,000.00
(Rs.3,500/- x 12 x 170
Funeral Expenses: Rs. 5,000.00
Loss of consortium: Rs. 20,000.00
Loss of love and
affection: Rs. 40,000.00
Rs. 35,12,000.00
6. PW3-Krishnamurthy who was traveling as pillion rider has spoke
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
