1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.07.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.737 of 2011 and MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2 of 2011 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Rajapalayam Branch, Rajapalayam. .. Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs. 1.Ganapathy Subramaniam .. 1st Respondent/Claimant 2.M/s.Jai Renga Transport, No.367, 368, Mudankiyar Road, Rajapalayam .. 2nd Respondent/1st Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award dated 19.07.2010 passed in M.C.O.P.No.76 of 2008 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur. For Appellant .. Mr.C.Ramachandran For Respondent .. Mr.S.Deenadhayalan No.1 For Respondent .. No appearance No.2 JUDGMENT Challenge in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is to the the award dated 19.07.2010 passed in M.C.O.P.No.76 of 2008 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur. 2. The first respondent herein as petitioner has filed M.C.O.P.No.76 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal praying to pass an award of Rs.2,00,000/- by way of compensation, wherein the present appellant has been shown as second respondent. 3. It is stated in the petition that on 17.09.2007 at about 01.45 p.m., the mother of the petitioner viz., Mariammal has proceeded towards eastern side on Rajapalayam-Mudankiyar Road. At that time, the driver of the first respondent has driven the lorry bearing Registration No.TCM-3757 in rash and negligent manner and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 dashed against the said Mariammal. Due to accident, she sustained fatal injuries and subsequently she passed away. The vehicle which caused the accident, has been insured with the second respondent. Under the said circumstances, the present petition has been filed for getting the compensation mentioned in the petition. 4. It is stated in the counter filed on the side of the second respondent that the accident has not happened due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent. The entire accident has happened only due to the deceased and there is no merit in the petition and the same deserves to be dismissed. 5. On the basis of the available evidence on record the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,30,000/- by way of compensation. Against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the second respondent as appellant. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/second respondent has not touched the factum and manner of accident and his argument are two bold. The first and foremost limb of argument is that the deceased has attained 65 years of old and the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards love and affection. The second limb of argument is that at the time of passing the award, awarding 7.5% interest is in vogue, but the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has erroneously awarded 9% interest and under the said circumstances the award in question is liable to be modified. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/petitioner has contended that the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has failed to award anything towards funeral expenses and under the said circumstances, the award in question need not be set aside. 8. As rightly pointed out on the side of the appellant/second respondent, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards love and affection. Considering the age of the deceased and also the petitioner, this Court is of the view to award Rs.10,000/- towards love and affection. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has not awarded anything towards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- can be awarded towards funeral expenses and in aggregation the petitioner/first respondent is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/-. 9. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has awarded 9% interest. The award in question has been passed in the year 2010 and at the time of passing award only 7.5% interest in in vogue and therefore the first respondent/petitioner is entitled to get only 7.5% interest and altogether the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is liable to be allowed in part. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 10. In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed in part without costs and the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.76 of 2008 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal District Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur is modified as follows: The first respondent/petitioner is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- by way of compensation with 7.5% interest. In other aspect, the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is confirmed. If any excess amount is deposited in M.C.O.P.No.76 of 2008, the appellant/second respondent is entitled to withdraw the same. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur. +1 CC to Mr.C.Ramachandran, Advocate (SR.No.23874) C.M.A(MD)No.737 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2011 21.07.2011 smn NSV/18.8.11/3P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/