JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellants / claimants against the award passed by the Tribunal, dated 18.07.2022 in M.C.O.P.No. 1394 of 2015 claiming enhancement of compensation for the death of the deceased one Arumugam.

2. When the deceased was riding a motor-cycle along with his son Sakthi Vijay in Tirunelveli to Madurai main road, the bus belonging to the respondent Transport Corporation coming from the opposite direction hit against the deceased's motor cycle and the two were thrown away and fell on the road. The son of the deceased, who was the pillion rider suffered injuries as also the deceased sustained head injuries and succumbed to the same. Therefore, the widow and the son of the deceased filed a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.25 lakhs as compensation.

3. The respondent Transport Corporation filed a counter, wherein it was stated that the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the deceased and the claim petition was bad-in-law for non joinder of necessary party i.e., the Insurance Company of the motor cycle. The deceased had not worn helmet at the time of accident and also he did not possess valid driving licence at the time of the accident. The respondent therefore, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition as meritless.

4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, on appreciation of the entire evidence on record allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation as follows:

Sl.No.	Heads	Calculation (Rs.)
1.	Salary	7,000.00
2.	Future Prospects at 10%	7000 + 700 7,700.00
3.	1/3rd of the income (ii) deducted as personal expenses of the deceased	7700-2567 5,133.00
4.	Compensation after multiplier of 11 is applied	5133 * 12 * 11 6,77,556.00
5.	Loss of Consortium to the wife	44,000.00
6.	Loss of Estate	16,500.00
7.	Funeral Expenses	16,500.00
8.	Medical Expenses	2,39,127.00
Total Compensation Awarded		9,93,683.00
Amount of compensation to be deducted at 20%		1,98,737.00
Total compensation payable to the claimants after deduction		7,94,946.00

Not satisfied with the award passed by the Tribunal, the appellants / claimants have filed the present appeal.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants / claimants submits that the tribunal has deducted 20% of the compensation amount towards the contributory negligence of the deceased as the deceased did not wear helment at the time of the accident. According to the learned counsel, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court deduction for non wearing of helmet can only be at 10% and not 20%. The learned counsel further submitted that the tribunal had failed to award any compensation towards loss of consortium to the appellants 2 and 3, who lost their father in the accident. The learned counsel further submitted that the income assessed by the tribunal was very low. The learned counsel submitted that considering the fact that the deceased was a skilled carpenter aged 53 years, his income should have been taken at Rs.9,000/- per month.

6. The learned counsel for the respondent Transport Corporation, on the other hand submits that this Court in the case of Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. D.Ramakrishnan and Others reported in 2021 ACJ

511 had deducted 20% and therefore, the tribunal cannot be faulted for deducting 20% towards contributory negligence for not wearing helmet. The learned counsel submits that as far as the enhancement of income is concerned, in the absence of any evidence, the Tribunal was fully justified in adopting the notional income of Rs.7,000/- per month and adding 10% towards future prospects. He therefore, submits that the income assessed by the tribunal is justified and needs no interference.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent Transport Corporation fairly conceded that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 609, the appellants 2 and 3

Click Here to Read the rest of this document