The National Insurance Co. Ltd.,Chennai - 2 v. Jothi2.N. Rajasekaran

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 31.10.2008CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKARC.M.A.No.1756 of 2008andM.P.No.1 of 2008The National Insurance Co. Ltd.,Chennai - 2. ... Appellant/ 2nd Respondent vs.1.Jothi2.N. Rajasekaran ... Respondents/ Petitioner and ISt Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of theMotor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated08.08.2007 passed in MCOP.No.576 of 2005 on the file of the learnedMotor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District and SessionsJudge), Fast Track Court No.III, Poonamallee, ThiruvalloreDistrict. For appellant : Mr. J. ChandranFor respondent-1 : Mr. V.K.RajagopalanFor respondent-2 : No appearance.JUDGMENTInsurance company has filed this appeal challenging theaward dated 08.08.2007 passed in MCOP.No.576 of 2005 on the file ofthe learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District andSessions Judge), Fast Track Court No.III, Poonamallee, ThiruvalloreDistrict.2. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this casehappened on 9.9.2005. The deceased Robert, aged 21 years, wasriding a motor cycle near Maduravoyal when he was hit by a lorry https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ insured with the appellant. In that accident, the said Robertdied. The mother aged 39 years has filed the claim petitionclaiming a sum of Rs.6,03,000/- as compensation stating that thedeceased was an operator in Automatic Ancillary Service PrivateLimited, Vanagaram and earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- p.m.3. In support of the claim petition, the mother of thedeceased was examined as P.W.1. One Rooban, the eye witness, wasexamined as P.W.2. Documents Exs.P1 to P5 were marked. Ex.P1 isthe copy of the F.I.R. Ex.P2 is the copy of the post mortemcertificate. Ex.P3 is the legalheirship certificate. Ex.P4 is theSchool leaving certificate. Ex.P5 is the driving licence. No oraland documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased atRs.3,000/-p.m. in the absence of any specific document to show theincome of the deceased. After deducting 1/3rd towards personalexpenses of the deceased, by adopting 16 multiplier, the totalpecuniary loss was determined in a sum of Rs.3,84,000/-(Rs.24,000/- x 16= Rs.3,84,000/-). In all, the Tribunal grantedthe following amount as compensation with interest at the rate of7.5% p.a.Sl.No.HeadAmount granted by theTribunal1Loss of pecuniary benefitsRs.3,84,000/-2Loss of love and affectionRs. 10,000/-3Funeral expensesRs. 5,000/-TotalRs.3,99,000/-5. Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that thedeceased is a bachelor earning member and the mother alone is theclaimant. Therefore, a lesser contribution may be taken insofar asthe claimant is concerned. He also pleaded for reduction in themultiplier stating that the possibility of the deceased gettingmarried and the dependency of the mother getting reduced will haveto be considered. 6. Learned counsel for the claimant on the other hand statedthat the mother is a widow and she is totally depend on thedeceased son for subsistence. Therefore, the contribution andconsequent compensation to the mother may not be reduced. He alsostated that meager amount has been granted for loss of love andaffection to the mother and no amount was granted for transportexpenses. Hence, the award may be confirmed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

#7. The accident in this case happened in the year 2005. Thedeceased was 21 years and the mother claimant, who is 39 years, isa widow. The possibility of the deceased getting married shortlyis always there and the contribution to the mother getting reducedhas to be considered. Therefore, in the light of the decision ofthe Apex Court in in Bijoy Kumar Dugar - vs. - Bidya Dhar Duttareported in 2006 AIR SCW 1116 = 2006 (3) SCC 242, the propermultiplier in the case of the deceased bachelor earning memberwould be 12 and not 16 as determined by the Tribunal. As far asapportionment is concerned, it is pleaded that the son would spend50% of the income to himself and the balance 50% would be given tothe mother. Considering the fact that the mother is a widow andthe deceased is the only son, the contribution to the dependent-widowed mother taken by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000/- can beaccepted. Therefore, the loss of pecuniary benefits will beRs.2,000/- x 12 x 12 = Rs.2,88,000/-. The mother is entitled to afurther sum of Rs.5,000/- towards loss of love and affection. Sheis also entitled to a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards transport expenses. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows:-Sl.No.HeadAmount grantedby the TribunalAmount grantedby this court1Loss ofpecuniarybenefitsRs.3,84,000/-Rs.2,88,000/-2Loss of love andaffectionRs. 10,000/-Rs. 15,000/-3Funeral expensesRs. 5,000/-Rs. 5,000/-4Transportexpenses ----Rs. 2,500/-TotalRs.3,99,000/-Rs.3,10,500/-8. Since the accident happened in the year 2005 and the awardwas passed in the year 2007, the interest granted by the Tribunalat 7.5% stands confirmed.9. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is partlyallowed as follows:-(i) The award of the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.3,10,500/-from Rs.3,99,000/-.(ii) It is stated that entire amount has been deposited asper the order of this Court dated 25.6.2008 and the claimanthas withdrawn certain amount. The claimant is entitled to withdrawthe balance amount if any, as per the order of this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (iii) The appellant is entitled to withdraw the excess amountin deposit after settling the claimant. (iv) there shall be no orders as to costs.(v) Consequently, M.P.No. 1 of 2008 is closed. Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.raToThe Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Additional District and Sessions Judge), Fast Track Court No.III, Poonamallee, Thiruvallore District.1 cc to Mr.J. Chandran, Advocate, Sr. 607171 cc to Mr.V.K. Rajagopalan, Advocate, Sr. 60538C.M.A.No.1756 of 2008andM.P.No.1 of 2008RSY (CO)kk 12/1