IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 5.1.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3963 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, KVR Complex, 3rd floor, 80 feet road, Karur – 639 002. ... Appellant/3rd Respondent vs. 1.Mr.V.Nagaraj, 2.Mrs.N.Muthulaxmi, 3.Miss. N.Priya, 4.Mr.V.Velusamy, 5.Mrs.B.Pappammal. ... Respondents/Petitioners 1 to 3 and respondents 1 and 2 Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 11.8.2006 passed in M.C.O.P.No.128 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Dharapuram. For appellant : Mr.J.Chandran For respondents : Mr.S.Dhanasekaran for R1 to R3 JUDGMENT The New India Assurance Company is on appeal challenging the award dated 11.8.2006 passed in M.C.O.P.No.128 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court), Dharapuram. 2. Respondents 1 to 3/claimants appear through counsel Mr.S.Dhanasekaran. By consent of both the counsel, main appeal itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the bus who is responsible for the accident and the death and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ liability fixed on the appellant insurance company to compensate the claimants is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant and the same is confirmed. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation. 4. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 14.4.2004. The deceased N.Prakash alias Prakasam, aged 25 years, said to be running a power loom factory, digital video and photo studio at Vellakovil, was travelling in the bus insured with the appellant, from Vellakovil to Thiruchendur. The driver of the bus drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, lost his control and hit a road side tree. In that accident, several passengers suffered grievous injuries resulting in death. The said Prakash alias Prakasam also sustained grievous injuries. He died on the way to the hospital. The father aged about 50 years, mother aged 45 years and sister aged 20 years, filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.9 lakhs stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. 5. In support of the claim, the father of the deceased was examined as P.W.1, One Rajavelu, the co-passenger was examined as P.W.2. One Subbarayan, the owner of a Lathe Workshop was examined as P.W.3. Exs.P-1 to P-12 were marked, the details of which as mentioned in the award are as follows:- Ex.A-1 is the copy of FIR, Ex.A-2 is the copy of rough sketch, Ex.A-3 is the copy of observation mahazar, Ex.A-4 is the copy of post-mortem report, Ex.A-5 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection report, Ex.A-6 is the copy of charge sheet, Ex.A-7 is the death certificate, Ex.A-8 is the legal heir certificate, Ex.A-9 is the Assessment sheet of the deceased, Ex.A-10 is the certificate for studying computer course, Ex.A-11 is the conduct certificate issued by the Vellakovil Primary Health Centre and Ex.A-12 is the salary certificate given by Vellakovil Anna Industries. No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant insurance company, the third respondent before the Tribunal. 6. Though the claimants pleaded that the income of the deceased was Rs.5,000/- per month through his occupation in running a power loom factory, part time employment in digital video and photo studio and regular employment in Anna Industries Workshop, unfortunately, before the Tribunal, no material was placed to support the nature of employment in power loom factory and the digital video and photo studio. It is only the oral evidence of P.W.1, the father of the deceased, who claimed that his son was earning Rs.5,000/- per month https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ out of three modes of employment. According to the counsel for the claimants, the evidence of P.W.1 is that the income of the deceased was Rs.5,000/- per month by all the three means. The Tribunal, however, came to the conclusion that the income is only Rs.3,000/- per month. This is because, no material was placed to show higher income under the three different employment claimed. The Tribunal after deducting 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased, fixed the contribution to the family of the deceased at Rs.2,000/- per month (i.e., Rs.24,000/- per annum). By adopting 17 multiplier, the Tribunal fixed the pecuniary loss to the dependents of the deceased at Rs.4,08,000/- (Rs.24,000/- x 17 = Rs.4,08,000/-). The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5%:- Sl.N o. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits to the family of the deceased Rs.4,08,000/- 2 loss of love and affection to the father, mother and sister Rs. 5,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.4,18,000/- 7. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the plea taken by the appellant's counsel is that "17" multiplier adopted in the case of death of a bachelor, is on the higher side and therefore, the quantum of compensation has to be reduced. He relied on the Apex Court's decision in Bijoy Kumar Dugar – vs. - Bidyadhar Dutta and others reported in 2006 ACJ 1058. 8. Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3/claimants pleaded that the deceased was 25 years old and robust in health and earning income as stated above. The counsel, however, fairly conceded that unfortunately, before the Tribunal, no proper evidence was let in by the persons concerned. He pleaded that the quantum of compensation need not be reduced as meagre amount has been granted towards loss of love and affection for the mother, the father and the unmarried sister. Further, no amount has been granted towards transport expenses and loss of estate. 9. The accident in this case happened on 13.4.2004. The deceased was a 25 years old bachelor and earning member. The claim has been filed by the mother aged 45 years, unmarried sister aged 20 years and father aged 50 years. The possibility of the deceased getting married and the contribution to the dependents getting reduced has to be considered as one component. Further, a lump sum amount is being granted to the claimants on the death of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ deceased. On the other hand, though the claimants pleaded that the income of the deceased was at Rs.5,000/- per month, failed to support it by appropriate documentary evidence. If sufficient evidence had been let in, the income of the deceased in this case can be fixed on a higher sum taking note of the fact that the deceased was an earning member in the Erode District known for its high volume of production of goods and articles for domestic use and for export. The claimants, however, before the Tribunal failed to produce sufficient materials for whatever reason, having made a plea in this regard. It may be either ignorance or due to illiteracy or due to casual approach to the claim. 10. This is one among the many cases where no proper evidence is let in at the time of adjudication of the claims. For want of relevant oral or documentary evidence to support the claims great prejudice is caused to the claimants. 11. Considering the above said aspects, this court feels that the income of the deceased fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/- per month is marginally lower than the prevailing living wages at the place of occupation of the deceased. This court feels it appropriate to adopt a marginally higher multiplier of 14 as against 17 multiplier so as to adequately compensate the claimants and that will also take care of the lesser amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal for loss of love and affection. In this case, no amount has been granted towards loss of estate and transport expenses. The sum of Rs.5,000/- granted towards funeral expenses is confirmed. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows:- Sl. No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal Amount granted by this Court 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits to the family of the deceased (Rs.24,000/- x 17 = Rs.4,08,00/-) Rs.4,08,000/- --- 1(a) Loss of pecuniary benefits to the family of the deceased (Rs.24,000/- x 14 = Rs.3,36,000/-) --- Rs.3,36,000/- 2 loss of love and affection to the father, mother and sister Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.4,18,000/- Rs.3,46,000/- 12. Since the accident in this case happened on 13.4.2004 and the award was passed on 11.8.2006, the interest granted by the Tribunal at 7.5% is confirmed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 13. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part as follows:- (i) The award of the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.3,46,000/-from Rs.4,18,000/-. (ii) The interest granted by the Tribunal at 7.5% is confirmed. (iii) Counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount as ordered by this Court and it is granted. (iv) On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw the balance amount as apportioned below:- 1st respondent father Rs.1,00,000/- with proportionate interest 2nd respondent mother Rs.1,50,000/- with proportionate interest and entire costs 3rd respondent unmarried sister Rs.96,000/- with proportionate interest (v) There will be no order as to costs. (vi) Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To The Subordinate Judge, (The Motor Accident Tribunal), Dharapuram. 1 CC To Mr.J.Chandran, Advocate, SR NO.47 C.M.A.No.3963 of 2008 ksk(co) pmk/28.1.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/