IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 27.1.2009 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3801 of 2008 1.G.Chitra, 2.Minor G.Nithyasri, 3.S.Dhanalakshmi. (Minor 2nd appellant is represented by her mother and natural guardian, the first appellant. ... Appellants/Petitioners 1 to 3 vs. 1.H.Ramesh, 2.Wimco Tokyo General Insurance Company Ltd., II Floor, No.28, (Old No.195), North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. 3.S.Sivashanmugam. (The first respondent remained ex parte in the lower court, hence notice may be dispensed with) (Claim by 3rd respondent was dismissed in trial court, hence notice may be dispensed with) ... Respondents/Respondents 1 and 2 and 4th petitioner Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 3.7.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.332 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I), Poonamallee. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Appellant : Mr.V.Jagannathan For 2nd respondent : Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan for R2 JUDGMENT The wife, daughter and mother of the deceased, the claimants 1 to 3 have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation over and above the amount awarded by the Tribunal. 2. Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel appears for the second respondent insurance company. 3. It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 9.5.2006. The deceased S.Ganesh Babu, aged 26 years old, an emergency medical technologist at S.R.M. Medical College and Hospital, was riding on a motor cycle. He was hit by a lorry belonging to the first respondent driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner. The said lorry is insured with the second respondent insurance company. In that accident, the said Ganesh Babu died. On his death, the wife aged 26 years, minor daughter aged 8 month, mother aged 46 years and father aged 54 years filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.20,03,000/- stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month at the time of accident. 4. In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. One Saravanakumar was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked as detailed below:- Ex.A-1 is the photocopy of FIR, Ex.A-2 is the photocopy of post-mortem certificate, Ex.A-3 is the legal heir certificate, Ex.A-4 is the school transfer certificate, Ex.A-5 is the Hospital ward technician course certificate, Ex.A-6 is the salary certificate and Ex.A-7 is the bank statement account. No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the second respondent. 5. As far as the compensation is concerned, the same was decided by the Tribunal from paragraphs 8 of the award onwards in answer to point No.2. Though the income of the deceased was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ claimed at Rs.6,000/- per month which is supported by Exs.A-6 and A-7, the Tribunal in this case fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month. After deducting a sum of Rs.1,300/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed the sum of Rs.2,700/- as loss of contribution to the family of the deceased. By adopting 17 multiplier, the Tribunal fixed the loss of pecuniary benefits to the family of the deceased at Rs.5,50,800/- (Rs.2,700/- x 12 x 17 = Rs.5,50,800/-). The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum:- Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits Rs.5,50,800/- 2 Loss of consortium to the wife on the death of her husband Rs. 5,000/- 3 Loss of love and affection Rs. 15,000/- 4 Ambulance expenses Rs. 5,000/- 5 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.5,80,800/- 6. In appeal, the counsel for the appellants/claimants 1 to 3 placed reliance on Ex.A-6, the salary certificate issued by the employer, a private medical college hospital, stating that the salary of the deceased was Rs.6,000/- per month consolidated. This is supported by Ex.A-7 bank statement of account issued by City Union Bank wherein a sum of Rs.6,000/- has been credited to the account of the deceased on a monthly basis. These documents are not disputed by the second respondent. In such view of the matter, the Tribunal ought to have accepted Exs.A-6 and A-7 and fixed the income as claimed and the contribution to the family of the deceased should be fixed accordingly. The compensation, therefore granted towards pecuniary loss on the death of the deceased suffers from an infirmity as the documents, viz., Exs.A-6 and A-7 have not been considered in the correct perspective. For the above stated reason, the appeal has to succeed to the extent that the income of the deceased has to be revised as Rs.6,000/- per month. If 1/3 is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased, the loss of contribution to the family of the deceased will be Rs.4,000/- per month (i.e.) Rs.48,000/- per annum. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is not disputed by the second respondent. Therefore, the loss of pecuniary benefits to the family of the deceased will be Rs.8,16,000/- (Rs.48,000/- x 17 = Rs.8,16,000/-) as against Rs.5,50,800/-. The other amounts granted under conventional heads are not disputed. Hence, the award of the Tribunal is modified as follows:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal Amount granted by this Court 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits Rs.5,50,800/- Rs.8,16,000/- 2 Loss of consortium to the wife on the death of her husband Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 3 Loss of love and affection Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 4 Ambulance expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- 5 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.5,80,800/- Rs.8,46,000/- 7. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part as follows:- (i) The award of the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.8,46,800/- from Rs.5,80,800/-. (ii) The enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.2,65,200/- will suffer interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till date of deposit. (iii) Entire enhanced award amount is allotted to the share of the minor second appellant. (iv) The second respondent prays for eight weeks' time to deposit the enhanced award amount and is granted. (v) On such deposit, the same shall be invested in any nationalised bank proximate to the place of the residence of the first appellant/first claimant for a period of three years and renewable thereafter till the minor attains majority. The mother of the minor respondent is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest in respect of the share of the minor once in three months directly from the bank and for the said purpose the first appellant/first claimant shall open a savings bank account on the same branch and the interest amount shall be transferred to the account to be maintained by the mother. (vi) The nationalised bank to which the amount will be invested, shall intimate to the first appellant/mother of the minor of such deposit and confirm the same to the Tribunal that the first appellant has been duly informed. The Tribunal to instruct the bank accordingly. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (vii) Since the deposit is in the case of minor, the Tribunal is directed to send a report containing the details of the deposit to the High Court on such deposit. (viii) There will be no order as to costs. sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Poonamallee. + 1 c.c. to Mr. N. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate. S.R.No.3765. + 1 c.c. to Mr. V. Jaganathan, Advocate. S.R.No.3503. Judgment in C.M.A.No.3801 of 2008 MBS (CO) GSK 11.02.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/