IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.12.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3985 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Coimbatore Division-I, 37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore. ... Appellant/Respondent vs. 1.G.Kalamani, 2.G.Ganesan, 3.Minor Kalaivani, 4.Minor Mala, 5.K.Palanal. (Minor respondents 3 and 4 are represented by their mother and guardian Kalamani, the first respondent). ... Respondents/Petitioners Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award and decree dated 4.4.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.312 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court V), Tirupur. For appellant : Mr.S.S.Swaminathan ----- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ JUDGMENT The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 4.4.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.312 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court V), Tirupur, both on the negligence as well as on the quantum of compensation. 2. It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 26.2.2006. The deceased Gopalan, aged 41 years, working as a measurer Grade-II, in the Avinashi Agricultural Producer's Co-operative Marketing Society Avinashi, was travelling on a moped near Nambiyampalayam. He was hit by the bus belonging to the appellant transport corporation driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner. In that accident the said Gopalan suffered grievous injuries and died. The wife aged 33 years, son aged 19 years, two daughters aged 17 and 13 years, respectively and the mother aged 65 years filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.10 lakhs stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.5,832/- per month. 3. In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. One Palani, the eye witness to the accident, was examined as P.W.2. One Rengasamy, the Superintendent of Avinashi Agricultural Producer's Co-operative Marketing Society was examined as P.W.3. Exs.A-1 to A-5 were marked, the details which are as follows:- Ex.A-1 is the F.I.R. dated 27.2.2006, Ex.A-2 is the post-mortem certificate dated 27.2.2006, Ex.A-3 is the death certificate, Ex.A-4 is the legal heir certificate and Ex.A-5 is the salary certificate. On behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the conductor of the bus was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the respondent before the Tribunal. 4. On the question of negligence, the Tribunal based on the evidence of P.W.2, the eye witness to the accident and the F.I.R. Ex.A-1, came to the conclusion that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was rash and negligent in driving the bus and was responsible for the accident, in which the deceased died. The F.I.R. has been registered as against https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus. On behalf of the appellant, the conductor of the bus was examined to plead no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and he stated that the driver of the bus had given a report to the higher authorities and an investigation was done. The details of the report given by the driver to the authorities and the investigation report have not been placed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the evidence of the conductor of the bus is vague and bereft of details. The Tribunal held that the evidence of the conductor is not helpful to hold that the driver of the bus was not negligent. On the contrary, the Tribunal held that oral evidence of P.W.2, the eye witness and the details given in F.I.R., clearly establishes the case of the claimants, which is not contraverted by examining the driver of the bus belong to the appellant transport corporation. Therefore, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the death of the deceased was due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus and decided the issue accordingly. This court is not inclined to interfere with such finding of the Tribunal in the absence of any other relevant material to contravert the finding of the Tribunal. 5. As far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal decided the issue in paragraph 8 of the award onwards in answer to point No.2. The age of the deceased was fixed as 46 years based on the post-mortem certificate Ex.A-2. P.W.3, the Superintendent of the Avinashi Agricultural Producer's Co-operative Marketing Society, spoke about the income of the deceased and stated that the salary of the deceased was Rs.5,852/- per month and Ex.A-5 salary certificate was marked. P.W.3 further stated that the income of the deceased at the time of the evidence given by him will be around Rs.7,083/-, if the deceased was alive. He also stated that there was an increment of Rs.100/- every year. Considering all these aspects, the Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month (i.e.) Rs.72,000/- per annum. Out of this 1/3 was deducted in a sum of Rs.24,000/- towards personal expenses of the deceased and the contribution to the family of the deceased was taken as Rs.48,000/- per annum. The Tribunal adopted 13 multiplier in terms of second schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act and fixed the total loss of pecuniary benefits at Rs.6,24,000/- (Rs.48,000/- x 13 = Rs.6,24,000/-). The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5%:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents Rs.6,24,000/- 2 Loss of consortium to the wife on the death of her husband Rs. 20,000/- 3 Loss of love and affection to the son on the death of his father Rs. 15,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection to the two minor daughters (Rs.20,000/- each) on the death of their father Rs. 40,000/- 5 Loss of love and affection to the mother on the death of her son Rs. 5,000/- 6 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.7,09,000/- 6. Counsel for the appellant pleaded that the income of the deceased fixed at Rs.6,000/- per month is on the higher side and the multiplier is to be reduced. 7. This court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:- (i) The evidence of P.W.3, supported by Ex.A-5 salary certificate establishes that there is possibility of higher income to the deceased in future. In any event the Tribunal added a sum of Rs.200/- alone for the purpose of calculating the income of the deceased which is marginal. (ii) In terms of second schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the appropriate multiplier will be 13. The dependents are the wife, three children and the aged mother. Considering the period of service that the deceased had which is around 12 to 14 years, the multiplier of 13 can be justified. (iii) Considering above aspects, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation and the interest granted by the Tribunal at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2006 and the award is of the year 2008. 8. Finding no merit, the Civil Miscellaneous appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant transport corporation prays for eight weeks' time to deposit the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ award amount and is granted. On such deposit claimants are permitted to withdraw the same as per order of the Tribunal. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. ts Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To The Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal) Tirupur. + 2 ccs to MR. S. S. Swaminathan, Advocate SR No.71108 Judgment in C.M.A.No.3985 of 2008 SR(CO) SR/21.1.2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/