IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the Court's authority to adjust the components of compensation, such as notional income, loss of love and affection, transportation, and pain and sufferings, based on legal principles and precedents.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the judgment and decree made in MCOP.No.752 of 2014 dated 16.09.2019 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Special District Judge), Dharmapuri and enhance the award.)

1. This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 16.09.2019 in MCOP.No.752 of 2014.

2. The learned counsel for the claimant would submit that on 11.10.2013, while one Mangai was walking at Kamaraj Nagar Road Junction, a Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-39-AP-1197, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against her, due to which she was admitted at Government Dharmapuri Medical College Hospital and died during treatment on 18.11.2013. Considering all the aspects, the Tribunal had awarded the compensation in the following manner:

3. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that due to the accident, which was occurred in the year 2013, the deceased was admitted in the Hospital till 18.11.2013 and thereafter she died. At the time of accident, the deceased, who was aged about 80 years old, was working as a milk-vendor. When such being the case, the Tribunal should have awarded a sum of Rs.9,000/- as notional income of the deceased. However, only a sum of Rs.3,000/- was fixed by the Tribunal as notional income and the same is too low. Hence, she requests this Court to enhance the same.

4. Further, he would submit that there are 5 claimants and hence, the Tribunal had rightly deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased. In support of his contention, he referred a judgment rendered by this Court in CMA.No.1664 of 2018, wherein, a sum of Rs. 9,000/- has been fixed as notional income of the deceased, who was aged about 80 years old. Further, he would contend that no amount was awarded towards Transportation, Loss of Consortium and Loss of Love and Affection. Hence, she requests this Court to re-determine the same.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the accident was occurred in the year 2013, whereas the appeal (CMA.No.1664 of 2018) referred by the appellants, wherein a sum of Rs.9,000/- was fixed as notional income, is pertaining to the year 2016.

6. He would refer to the judgement of this Court in Selvambal @ Tamilarasi and others vs. Lenin and others (CMA.Nos.1701 and 1702 of 2019), wherein for the accident occurred in the year 2014, a sum of Rs.6,000/- has been fixed as notional income of the deceased, who is aged about 80 years old. He would also refer to another judgment of this Court in Thilagavathy and others vs. K.Thangadurai and another (CMA.No.255 of 2011), wherein for the accident occurred in the year 2006, a sum of Rs.3,000/- has been fixed as notional income of the deceased, who is aged about 80 years old. Hence, he would request this Court to fix any reasonable amount from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.6,000/- as notional income of the deceased. With regard to all the other heads, he would submit that any reasonable amount may be fixed in accordance with the settled principles of law.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents and also perused the documents available on records.

8. In the present case, the accident was occurred in the year 2013 and at the time of accident, the deceased, who was aged about 80 years old, had undergone treatment and died on 18.11.2013. There is no dispute with regard to the occurrence of accident and fixation of negligence. The only aspect that has to be decided is with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. While awarding compensation towards loss of income, the Tribunal fix