Court modified compensation to reflect accurate income levels and future prospects, following Supreme Court precedents, resulting in a total enhancement of awarded compensation.

JUDGMENT :

(M. DHANDAPANI, J.)

Challenging the decree and judgment dated 16.09.2019 made in M.C.O.P.No.646 of 2017, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (District & Sessions Judge, Additional District Court Fast Track Court), Kanchipuram, the claimants have filed the above appeal.

2. Mrs.R.Srevidhya, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the 2^nd respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel for the appellant and the second respondent, this appeal is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. It is the case of the claimants that, on 16.07.2017 at about 5.30 p.m., when the deceased was riding a two-wheeler bearing Regn.No.TN 21 AP 7554, a TATA ACE vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN-25-AW-0081 owned by the 1^st respondent insured with the 2^nd respondent driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came in the opposite direction and dashed against the two wheeler in which the deceased was travelling, due to which the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. Thereby, the appellants, who are the dependents of the deceased filed a claim petition in MCOP.No.646 of 2017 claiming a compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-.

4. Before the Tribunal, the appellants examined P.W.1 and P.W.2 and marked Exhibits P.1 to P.8 and on the side of the respondents, no documents were marked and no witnesses were examined. After trial, the Tribunal, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence came to a conclusion that the accident had taken place solely due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the 1^st respondent and awarded Rs.11,28,400/- towards compensation for the death of the deceased and held that the 1^st and 2^nd respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the above compensation. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants/claimants have come up with this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the above said accident happened solely due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the 1^st respondent and the accident is of the year 2017 and at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 20 years and was working in a Private company earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month, however, the tribunal had taken the notional income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/-, which is very meagre and the same is contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in catena of decisions and thereby, the same has to be interfered with. Further, the compensation awarded under other heads are also on the lower side and the same needs to be enhanced. Accordingly, he prayed for appropriate orders.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2^nd respondent-Insurance Company contended that, by considering all the relevant documents, the Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation, which does not require any enhancement. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

7. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8. The factum and manner of the accident is not disputed by the parties and the parties have not raised any issue on the aspect of negligence and therefore, this Court is not venturing into the same.

9. Insofar as the quantum of compensation fixed by the tribunal is concerned, the accident is of the year 2017 and at the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 20 years and he was working