The court established the principle that the deceased did not contribute to the accident and reduced the quantum of compensation based on the notional income and legal principles.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the award dated 24.02.2021 passed in MCOP No.2497 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court], Chennai.)

Respondent/owner of the vehicle, is the appellant herein, challenging the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special Sub Court No.1, Small Causes Court), Chennai, vide judgment and decree dated 24.02.2021 in MCOP No.2497 of 2015, on the ground that since the deceased was sitting on the road, she had contributed to the accident and further, the notional income fixed by the tribunal and overall compensation awarded, are on the higher side.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as per their ranking before the claims tribunal.

3. The findings regarding factum of the accident and the manner of accident, were not disputed and hence, the findings of the tribunal are hereby confirmed.

4. Learned Government Advocate could contend that in view of the admission in the cross examination, wherein PW1 has stated that her mother was sitting on the road on the fateful day, claims tribunal ought to have fixed the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.

5. Learned Government Advocate further contended that the claims tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.7,80,000/- towards loss of dependency, fixing sum of Rs.6,000/- as monthly income of the deceased, which is on the higher side. He further submitted that the dependants/claim petitioners, 1 and 2 are sons aged 30 and 27 and hence, award of Rs.50,000/- under the head loss of love and affection, is also exorbitant. Thus, he seeks for reduction in the quantum of compensation.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents 1and 2/claim petitioners could contend that PW2-R.Gopi, is an eye-witness and he had categorically deposed that on 22.12.2013 at about 10.00pm, he was waiting near the Mariamman Koil next to Bhavani Petrol Bunk at Muthusamy Salai and at that time, a Jeep bearing Regn.No.TN21G0940, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, came from Frazer Bridge road towards Muthusamy Salai Junction, on the wrong side, dashed against a lady, who was sitting in front of the Muthumariamman Temple.

7. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8. Perusal of the award shows that RW1-Mohan, the driver of the offending vehicle viz., Police Jeep has deposed that on the date of accident, the deceased Lakshmi was sitting on the road that too in the pitch dark night at about 10.30pm. Copy of the Judgment, acquitting driver of the Jeep-Mohan on the grounds of benefit of doubt, was produced before the claims tribunal as Ex.R1.

9. On a combined reading of the oral evidence of PW2 and RW1, and documentary evidence of Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, this Court comes to the conclusion that the version of RW1 is only a self-saving statement and accordingly, I have no hesitation to reject the evidence of RW1 and to rely upon the evidence of PW2. Hence, the finding rendered by the claims tribunal that the accident has taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the appellant vehicle, does not warrant any interference as the same does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity.

10. On the point of quantum of compensation, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate, the notional income fixed at Rs.6,000/-pm for the deceased aged 48 years, who claimed to be a flower vendor, is excessive, in the absence of substantial evidence. Therefore, taking into consideration the year of the accident i.e. 2013 and the avocation, this Court feels it just and reasonable to fix Rs.5,000/-per month as notional income. Accordingly, by applying -13- multiplier as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Varma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd., reported in TNMAC 2009 (2) SC; and adding 25% towards future prospects as per the deci