Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 2278
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
Mythili - Appellant
Versus
S. Saravanan and Ors. – Respondents
C.M.A.No.3274 of 2024
Decided On : 16-12-2024
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellant : Mr. S.P. Yuaraj
For the Respondents : Mr. R. Rathnathara.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.S.P.Yuara
For the Respondent: Mr.R.Rathnathara for R2
The court established that future prospects must be included in compensation calculations, and personal expenses for a bachelor should be deducted at 50%.
Headnote:
(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Compensation for fatal accident - The Tribunal awarded Rs.22,41,000/- which was enhanced to Rs.25,61,000/- by the Court, considering future prospects and personal expenses - The deceased was a Lecturer earning Rs.50,000/- per month, but Tribunal fixed income at Rs.16,000/- - The Court modified the compensation under various heads, including loss of income, love and affection, and funeral expenses. (Paras 3, 10, 11)
(B) Appeal - The court considered the arguments of both parties regarding the quantum of compensation and the basis for calculating income and expenses. (Paras 5, 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The deceased, Vijayanand, was killed in a road accident caused by a bus driven negligently. The claimant, his mother, sought compensation for the loss. (Paras 2, 4)
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the Tribunal's compensation was inadequate and modified it based on proper calculations of income and expenses. (Paras 9, 12)
Issues: The main issues were the appropriate income to be considered for the deceased and the adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. (Paras 5, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that future prospects should be considered in calculating compensation and that personal expenses should be deducted at ½ for a bachelor, leading to a revised compensation amount. (Paras 9, 12)
Result: The appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the compensation to Rs.25,61,000/- with interest.
JUDGMENT :
(M. DHANDAPANI, J.)
The appellant / claimant, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Salem, in M.C.O.P.No.2062 of 2019, dated 07.10.2021, has filed this appeal.
2. On 20.07.2019, at about 05.30 p.m., when the deceased, namely, Vijayanand, was riding in his two wheeler along with a pillion rider on his extreme left in Salem to Omalur main road near Vijaya Sesha Mahal, a bus bearing Reg.No.TN 30 AS 3396 belonging to the first respondent was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner in the same direction and hit behind the two wheeler, due to which, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and he was admitted in Manipal Hospital, Salem, however, he died on the same day. Under these circumstances, the claim petition came to be filed by the appellant before the Tribunal seeking for compensation. Though the third respondent is the father of the deceased, since he is the owner of the two wheeler, he was impleaded as third respondent and the respondent No.4 is the insurer of the two wheeler. The second respondent is the insurer of the bus.
3. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the claimant, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. On the side of the respondents, no witness was examined and no document was marked. The Tribunal, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, came to a conclusion that the accident had taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the first respondent's vehicle. Having reached such a finding, the Tribunal proceeded to fix the total compensation at Rs.22,41,000/- under various heads. The above compensation was directed to be paid by the first and second respondents jointly and severally along with interest at 7.5% p.a.
4. The claimant, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, has filed this appeal seeking compensation.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the deceased was working as Lecturer in Kauvery Polytechnic College, Mettur and was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month, at the time of accident, however, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.16,000/- only and future prospects was not awarded. He further submitted that the appellant is the mother of the deceased and the third respondent is the father of the deceased and since the third respondent is the owner of the two-wheeler, he was impleaded as the third respondent. The deceased was a bachelor at the time of accident and instead of deducting ½ towards personal expenses, the Tribunal has deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses and the amount awarded under the head love and affection is also very meage and no amount is awarded under the head loss of estate. Hence, he prays for enhancement of compensation.
6. The first respondent remained ex-parte before the Tribunal.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent / Insurance company submitted that the deceased has suddenly turned right without signal and invited the accident and during the time of accident, the deceased was not wearing the helmet and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very excessive. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this appeal.
8. This Court gave its careful consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
9. In the instant case, the deceased was aged about 28 years at the time of accident and was working as Lecturer in a Private College and earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month. The Tribunal, considering the salary Certificate produced by the appellant which is marked as Ex.P13, has fixed the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.16,000/- which does not require any interference. However, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance
