C.M.A.No.1629 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI

C.M.A.No.1629 of 2021

and

C.M.P.No.8557 of 2021

The Regional Manager,

Andhrapradesh State Road Transport Corporation,

Tirupathi,

Andhrapradesh.

... Appellant

vs.

1.K.Lakshmi

2.Amruthamma

3.Masthanamma

4.Lavakumar

... Respondents

PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, against Award and Decree dated 18.10.2019

passed by the Hon'ble Special District Judge, Tiruvallur in

M.C.O.P.No.3/2019 is praying to set aside the above said Award and

Decree against this appellant.

For Appellant : Mrs.G.V.Shoba

For Respondents : Mr.R.Kumaravel

JUDGMENT

The sole respondent namely the Regional Manager, Andhra

Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Tirupathi, has preferred

1/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1629 of 2021

this appeal against the judgment and decree passed in

M.C.O.P.No.3/2019, dated 18.10.2019 on the file of Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal(Special District Judge), Tiruvallore, challenging the

quantum.

2. The legal heirs of one Mohan Reddy who died in the road

accident occurred on 06.06.2018 filed the above said petition, claiming

compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles

Act and Rule (3) of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Rules. The learned

Tribunal after hearing both sides arguments and upon perusal of oral

and documentary evidence, has passed an award for a sum of

Rs.10,49,660/- payable with interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of

petition (03.01.2019) till the date of deposit within two months from the

date of the judgment. Out of the award amount, 1^st and 4^th respondents

/ claimants 1 and 4 being the children of the deceased were ordered to

receive Rs.1,00,000/- each and 2^nd and 3^rd respondents / claimants 2

and 3 being the wives of the deceased were ordered to receive

Rs.4,24,830/- each.

2/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1629 of 2021

3. Mrs.G.V.Shoba, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant/Transport Corporation would argue that the 1^st and 4^th

respondent/Claimants 1 and 4 being the married daughter and grown

up son of the deceased cannot be considered as dependents and only

one wife can be treated as his dependent. She would further argue that

while determining the compensation the Tribunal has deducted 1/4^th for

personal expenses which is incorrect as the 1^st respondent is a

married daughter, 3^rd respondent is a second wife and 4^th respondent

is a married son of the deceased, half of the income arrived at to be

deducted and not 1/4^th as done by the Tribunal.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents

1 to 4 / Claimants 1 to 4 would argue that all the four claimants are the

dependents of the deceased and the Tribunal has rightly passed an

award in favour of all the respondents/claimants and the apportionment

details as mentioned supra needs no interference.

5. From the perusal of the records, it appears that the 1^st

petitioner is married and residing at Elakatur, Chithoor District, Andhra

Pradesh. The 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners being wives of the deceased had

3/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A.No.1629 of 2021

been residing in Chithoor District in different places. The 4^th petitioner

being the son of the deceased Mohan Reddy aged 35 years is said to

be residing at Oothukkottai.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in respect of the

deductions to be made towards personal and living expenses in

complete. The pivot issue in this appeal is that whether a married

daughter and major son are dependents or not ? and Whether they are

entitled to be paid any compensation under Motor Vehicles Act or not ?

7. Similar question arose in Cholan Roadways Corporation

Ltd., v. Pavun Raj and others reported in 2000 ACJ 616, wherein,

this Court had an occasion to deal