The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper calculation of compensation in fatal accident cases, based on the reasonable monthly income of the deceased and legal precedents.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed u/s.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgement and decree dated 31.03.2015 passed in M.C.O.P.No.919 of 2013 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases, Krishnagiri.)

D. Krishnakumar, J.

Questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in and by its judgement and decree dated 31.03.2015 passed in M.C.O.P.No.919 of 2013 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases, Krishnagiri, the appellant Insurance Company has filed the present appeal.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

On 27.04.2005, Dr.P.Kappil Devh boarded the M.S.Raja Bus bearing Registration No.TN-30/F-3996 at 12.00 hours from Namakkal Bus Stand to go to Salem after completing B.V.Sc. Course at Namakkal. He was seated on the backside of the driver's seat in the said bus in the window side along with his brother Nethaji. When the bus was proceeding near Ayeepalayam Rasi Nutri Food company, in Namakkal to Salem Main Road, the driver of the said bus drove the same rashly and in a negligent manner and it dashed against an oncoming lorry bearing Registration No.TNA 4675, insured with the fifth respondent insurance company, which was coming in the opposite direction. The right side window portion of the bus dashed on the lorry and due to the impact, Kappil Devh who was seated on the right side of the bus, sustained grievous and fatal injuries on his head. He was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Rasipuram, but he died on the way to hospital. The claimants, namely G.Rangasamy and Pachiyammal, who are the parents of the deceased Dr.R.Kappil Devh, filed a Claim Petition in M.C.O.P.No.919 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Princial District Judge), Krishnagiri, claiming compensation of Rs.90,24,950/-.

3. Resisting the claim made by the respondents 1 and 2 / claimants, the appellant insurance company has filed a counter inter alia contending that the accident had not occurred in the manner as projected by respondents 1 and 2. They have denied the basis on which the Trial Court has arrived at the income of the deceased.

4. To prove the claim, first respondent examined himself as PW-1 and also two other witnesses and marked 21 exhibits. On the side of the appellant insurance company, none were examined and no exhibits were marked. On the side of the Court, One Nirmala, who was working as Typist in the Veterinary College where the deceased was last working, was examined as CW1 and Exs.C1 to C4 were marked.

5. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal found that the accident had occurred owing to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing Registration No.TAN 4675, insured with the fifth respondent/New India Insurance Company and also due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus bearing Registration No.TN 30- F3996, insured with the appellant Insurance Company. Accordingly, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.52,60,000/- under the following heads :

The aforesaid compensation was ordered to be payable to the claimants, jointly and severally by the respondents 3 to 5 herein and the appellant herein with interest at 7.5 % p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Out of the award amount of Rs.52,60,000/-, the first claimant is allotted Rs.25,00,000/- and the second claimant is allotted Rs.27,60,000/-. Questioning the quantum of compensation, the appellant Insurance Company has filed the present appeal.

6. Mr.S.Arunkumar, learned counsel for the appellant insurance company submitted tha