The court's decision emphasized the importance of considering the deceased's notional income, age, and nature of work in determining compensation, as guided by relevant legal principles.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree dated 11.01.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.429 of 2018 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai.)

V.M. Velumani, J.

1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 11.01.2021 made in M.C.O.P.No.429 of 2018 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai.

2. The appellants along with one Venkatraman are the claimants in M.C.O.P.No.429 of 2018 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court, Chennai. They filed the said claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.75,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one Vinayagam, who died in the accident that took place on 01.12.2017. Pending claim petition, the said Venkatraman, father of the deceased died.

3. The Tribunal considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of car belonging to the 1st respondent and directed the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company being insurer of the said car to pay a sum of Rs.16,37,500/- as compensation to the appellants.

4. Not being satisfied with the amounts awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have come out with the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the deceased was aged 49 years at the time of accident, he was working as a Mason and was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. The Tribunal without considering the same, fixed only a meagre sum of Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased. The Tribunal has granted only 25% enhancement towards future prospects. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are meagre and prayed for enhancement of compensation.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/Insurance Company contended that the appellants have not filed any document with regard to avocation and income of the deceased. In the absence of any material with regard to avocation and income of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased, which is excessive. The Tribunal after considering all the materials on record, awarded compensation, which is not meagre. The appellants have not made out any case for enhancement of compensation and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the entire materials available on record.

8. It is the contention of the appellants that the deceased was working as a Mason at the time of accident and was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. The appellants have not filed any document and proved the said contention. The Tribunal in the absence of any evidence with regard to avocation and income of the deceased, fixed a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income of the deceased. The accident is of the year 2017 and the notional income fixed by the Tribunal is meagre. Considering the age and nature of work done by the deceased, a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month is fixed as notional income of the deceased. As per Exs.P3 and P18/Death certificate and Post-mortem certificate, the deceased was aged 50 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal, following the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC) [National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi and others] and 2009 (2) TNMAC 1 SC (Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another), has rightly granted 25% enhancement towards future prospects and applied multiplier 13'. There are five dependants of the deceased and the Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses. Thus, by fixing Rs.1