SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1352

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. BALAJI, J.
United India Insurance Company Ltd., Namakkal – Appellant
Versus
Selvam & Others – Respondents
C.M.A. No. 2734 of 2019
Decided On : 09-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:D. Bhaskaran, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1 to R3, Ma. P. Thangavel, Advocate.

The relevance of the FIR in determining liability and the calculation of notional income and deduction towards personal living expenses in fatal accident compensation cases.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act - Compensation - 173 - 173 - 2018 (1) TNMAC 34 (SC), 2021 SCC Online SC 3339 - The court discussed the applicability of contributory negligence and the relevance of FIR in determining liability. It also considered the notional income of the deceased and the deduction towards personal living expenses. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the award passed by the Tribunal.

Fact of the Case:

The claimants sought compensation for the death of Mr. Mohankumar in a road accident. The insurance company denied liability, contending that the deceased was at fault and that the FIR lodged by a pillion rider supported their claim.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the insurance company failed to prove the entire liability on the deceased and fixed 50% towards contributory negligence. It upheld the award of Rs.11,59,200/- passed by the Tribunal.

Issues: Liability of the insurance company, contributory negligence, notional income of the deceased, and deduction towards personal living expenses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the FIR is a material piece of evidence but cannot be the sole basis for rejecting a claim for compensation in a fatal accident. It also considered the notional income of the deceased and the deduction towards personal living expenses based on relevant case law.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the award passed by the Tribunal, with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to set aside the judgment and decree dated 23.11.2018, made in M.C.O.P. No.1527 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,(Additional District Judge), Namakkal.)

1.This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the award dated 23.11.2018 in M.C.O.P.No.1527 of 2015 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Namakkal), awarding a sum of Rs.11,59,200/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, at the instance of the 2 nd respondent before the Tribunal viz., the insurance company.

2. Brief facts necessary for adjudicating the grounds raised before this Court are as follows:

The claimants viz., the respondents 1 to 3 herein sought for a compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- for the death of Mr.Mohankumar, S/o Mr.Selvam in a road accident on 04.09.2015. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased was travelling in his two wheeler on Salem-Namakkal National Highway and at about 08.30 a.m, a lorry bearing registration No. TN-28-AE-1576, proceeding in the same direction and before the two wheeler driven by the deceased, without any signal applied sudden brake as a result of which the deceased suffered head injuries and that he was subsequently admitted to hospital and treated. However, the said Mohankumar succumbed to the injuries suffered in the accident and died on 26.09.2015. The claimants are the father, mother and sister of the deceased. It is further stated that deceased Mohankumar was aged only 19 years and he was pursuing his second year B.E course. Compensation was claimed under various heads totalling in all Rs.40,00,000/-.

3. The appellant herein as the 2 nd respondent filed a counter denying that the driver of the lorry was at fault. The counter also put forth an interesting contention that the FIR was lodged by the friend of the deceased himself, who infact was a pillion rider along with the deceased and that he having suffered injuries, has filed an independent claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.283 of 2016. It is further contended in the counter that in the said FIR it has been mentioned that the deceased tried to ride the bike in between the lorry and another private college bus and therefore, the deceased contributed to the accident by his rash and negligent driving. It is also stated that even though the rules permit only one pillion rider, the deceased was driving the bike with two pillion riders, both of whom have filed independent claim petitions alleging that the deceased Mohankumar alone was at fault. In short, the appellant contended that they are not liable to compensate the fanciful claims made by the respondents 1 to 3 herein.

4. Before the Tribunal, the father of the deceased the 1 st respondent herein was examined as P.W.1 and an eye witness, Mr.Manivannan was examined as P.W.2. Exs.P.1 to 17 were marked on the side of the respondents. On the side of the appellant one Mr.Palanichmay, Deputy Manager of the insurance company was examined as R.W.1 and Exs.R.1 and R.2 were marked on the side of the appellant.

5. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record and with regard to the rival submissions made by the counsel on either side, held that the insurance company had not proved, by examining any eye witness, with regard to the fastening of entire liability on the deceased. However, the Tribunal taking note of the evidence held that the deceased contributed to the accident and fixed 50% towards contributory negligence. With regard to the compensation to be awarded to the respondents herein, the Tribunal fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.8,400/- per month and applied a multiplier of 18 and awarded a sum of Rs.18,14,100/- towards loss of income. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.4,69,000/- towards medical bills/expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards transportation expen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top