IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.04.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1814 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.13038 of 2022 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, represented by its Manager, G.K.Complex, 1st Floor, Dharmapuri Main Road, Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District. ... Appellant Vs.

1.Nandhini W/o.Sampath

2.Sampath S/o.Subramani

3.The Correspondent, Bharani International Matric School, Mathur Main Road, Kannandahalli Village and Post, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and decree made in M.C.O.P.No.1101 of 2019, dated 03.12.2020 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases, Krishnagiri.

For Appellant : Mr.E.Rajadurai for M/s.M.B.Gopalan Associates For Respondents : Mr.J.Pradeep [R1 & R2]

*****

JUDGMENT

The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal aggrieved by the award in M.C.O.P.No.1101 of 2019, dated 03.12.2020, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court for Motor Accident Claims Cases, Krishnagiri.

2. The Insurance Company has mainly questioned the quantum of compensation fixed by the Tribunal.

3. The claimants are the parents of the deceased minor child aged about 2½ years. On 04.06.2014, at about 7.45 a.m., the minor child was standing in front of her house and the school bus belonging to the third respondent was driven in a rash and negligent manner and it dashed on the child resulting in the child sustaining fatal injuries and died on the spot. A First Information Report came to be registered in Crime No.255 of 2014. It is under these circumstances, the claim petition was filed by the parents seeking for compensation.

4. 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 of the school bus belonging to the third respondent. Having rendered such a finding, the Tribunal proceeded to decide as to whether the parents are entitled to make the claim for compensation and it was held that they are entitled to maintain the claim petition and receive the claim amount. Thereafter, the Tribunal fixed the compensation payable at Rs.8,90,000/- in the following manner:

The Tribunal directed the above compensation to be paid with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a.

5. Questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant insurance company has filed the present appeal.

6. Heard Mr.E.Rajadurai, learned counsel for appellant insurance company and Mr.J.Pradeep, learned counsel for respondents 1 and

2/claimants.

7. This Court carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.

8. This Court also carefully went through the award passed by the Tribunal.

9. The main issue that was urged by learned counsel for appellant insurance company is that the Tribunal has fixed the notional income of the deceased child at Rs.60,000/- p.a. which is on the higher side. Learned counsel, by relying upon various judgments, submitted that the notional income for the minor child cannot exceed Rs.30,000/- p.a. Insofar as the multiplier that was adopted, learned counsel fairly submitted that the Tribunal ought to have adopted multiplier '15' instead of '13'. Insofar as the other heads under which the compensation was fixed, no serious objections were raised.

10. While fixing compensation for a child, it is important for the Court to take note of the age of the parents. If the age of the parents is low and they are capable of having another child, that becomes a criteria fo