The Managing Director,Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Kumbakonam v. Poovaraghavan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 30.3.2009CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKARC.M.A.No.732 of 2009andM.P.No.1 of 2009 The Managing Director,Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Kumbakonam. ... Appellant/Respondent vs.1.Poovaraghavan,2.Mala. ... Respondents/Petitioners 1 and 2Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of MotorVehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 10.9.2007passed in M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2006 on the file of the MotorAccidents Claims Tribunal (Additional Sub Court), Mayiladuthurai.For appellant : Mr.V.RameshJUDGMENTThe Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation is on appealchallenging the award dated 10.9.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.No.146 of2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal(Additional Sub Court), Mayiladuthurai. 2. It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of thecase are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on18.8.2005. The deceased minor Prathipa, a 12 years old student,was boarding the bus belonging to the appellant transportcorporation. The driver of the bus negligently moved the bus.Due to sudden movement of the bus, the said Prathipa fell down onthe ground. The rear wheel of the bus ran over the hip and twolegs of the said Prathipa. The said Prathipa sustained crushinjuries. She was treated in the Karaikal Government Hospital. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Despite treatment, the said Prathipa died on 14.10.2005. Thefather aged 34 years and the mother aged 28 years filed a claimfor compensation in a sum of Rs.5 lakhs.3. In support of the claim, the mother of the deceased wasexamined as P.W.1. Exs.A-1 to A-8 were marked, the details ofwhich are as follows:-Ex.A-1 is the true copy of FIR, dated 18.8.2005,Ex.A-2 is the true copy of alteration report sent to the criminalcourt, dated 14.10.2005,Ex.A-3 is the true copy of post-mortem certificate dated14.10.2005,Ex.A-4 is the surgery certificate,Ex.A-5 is the true copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's InspectionReport dated 19.8.2005 andExs.A-6 to A-8 are the photos and negatives of the injuredPrathipa.No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of theappellant transport corporation, the respondent before theTribunal.4. The Tribunal in terms of second schedule to Section 163Aof the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, fixed the income notionally atRs.15,000/- per annum. Based on the age of the deceased, theTribunal adopted multiplier 15. After deducting 1/3 towardspersonal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal granted a sum ofRs.1,50,000/- (Rs.15,000/- x 15 x 2/3 = Rs.1,50,000/-) ascompensation to the parents of the deceased minor. The Tribunalalso granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, theTribunal granted the following amounts as compensation withinterest at 7.5% per annum:-Sl.No.HeadAmount granted bythe Tribunal1Loss of pecuniary benefitsRs. 1,50,000/-2Funeral expensesRs. 5,000/-3Transport expensesRs. 2,000/-4Loss of love and affection to the parentson the death of their only child(Rs.25,000/- each)Rs. 50,000/-TotalRs .2,07,000/-5. On the basis of the oral and documentary evidence, theTribunal held that the accident in this case happened due to rashand negligent driving by the driver of the appellant transport https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ corporation bus. There is no material placed on behalf of theappellant transport corporation to controvert the finding of thenegligence. Hence, the finding of rash and negligent driving onthe part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus,as responsible for the accident and the death and the liabilityfixed on the appellant transport corporation to compensate theclaimants is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant andthe same is confirmed. The only contention seriously contendedby the learned counsel for the appellant is on the quantum ofcompensation. 6. The contention raised by the learned counsel for theappellant is on the quantum of compensation, stating that themultiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal in a case of death of a12 years old student is high resulting in excess compensation. Healso contended that the sum of Rs.25,000/- each granted towardsloss of love and affection to the parents of the deceased isexcessive. Therefore, the compensation has to be reduced.7. On perusing the award of the Tribunal, this Court is notinclined to interfere with the award on the above contention and toreduce the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:-(i) The accident in this case happened on 18.8.2005. (ii) The deceased was 12 years old girl student at the time ofaccident and studying 6st standard.(iii) The Apex Court in Manju Devi and another – vs. - MusafirPaswan and another reported in 2005 ACJ 99 = 2005(1) TAC 609(SC), granted a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- as compensation on thedeath of the 12 years old student. In the Apex Court'sdecision, the accident happened in the year 1999. In thiscase, the accident happened on 18.8.2005. Hence the quantumof compensation granted is justified. (iv) The parents losing their child at a tender age is apermanent scar in their life and the grief will linger tilltheir life time. In a claim for compensation, in the case ofdeath, the claimants are granted compensation underconventional heads, like loss of love and affection, funeralexpenses and miscellaneous expenses and loss of estate in thecase of death of an earning member. The entitlement of theclaimants/parents for compensation on conventional heads cannotbe disputed.(v) The claimants in this case are father and mother claimingcompensation on the death of their only daughter. The childwas given education in a school. The parents will expect her https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ to do well in life and their expectation of the brightprospects of their only daughter has been shattered due to heruntimely death and hence they have to be compensated for lossof love and affection consequent to the death of their child.This will be in addition to the compensation on other headsand the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is very meger. Hence, the sum ofRs.25,000/- each granted towards loss of love and affection tothe parents of the minor female child is justified. (vi) The sum of Rs.2,000/- granted towards funeral expenses and thesum of Rs.5,000/- granted towards transport expenses arereasonable and the same are confirmed.8. Considering the above aspects, the total compensation in asum of Rs.2,07,000/- is justified as also the interest granted at7.5% as the accident happened in the year 2005 and the award waspassed in the year 2007.9. Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal isdismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant seeksfor eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount and is grantedand on such deposit, the respondents/claimants are entitled towithdraw the same as per the order of the Tribunal. Consequently,connected miscellaneous petition is closed.Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.tsToThe Additional Subordinate Judge, (The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Mayiladuthurai. 1 cc to Mr.V. Ramesh, Advocate, SR. 11333C.M.A.No.732 of 2009SGL (CO)kk 15/4