IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.1.2009 CORAM:- THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.1587 of 2003 The United India Insurance Co. Limited, Branch Office-V, Sunitha Building, II Floor, D.B.Road, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore.2. .. Appellant/3rd Respondent Vs. 1. Govindammal 2. V. Murugesan 3. K. Vasudevan (Respondents 2 and 3 ex parte before lower court) .. Respondents/Petitioner and Respondents 1 & 2 Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V. Act against the award and decree dated 4.3.2002 made in MCOP No. 203 of 1995 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Sub Court) Tiruppur. For Appellant : Mr.M.B.Raghavan for Mr. N. Vijayaraghavan For Respondents : R1 - No appearance : R2 and R3 – notice dispensed with JUDGMENT United India Insurance has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 4.3.2002 made in MCOP No.203 of 1995 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Sub Court) Tiruppur. 2. Even though the first respondent/claimant was served on 23.2.2004, there is no appearance on her behalf. As per order dated 1.4.2004, notice to respondents 2 and 3 was dispensed with. 3. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 19.1.1995 at about 2.30 p.m. near Avinasipalayam medu. The deceased Krishnamoorthy, aged 27 years, an agriculturist, was proceeding on a motor cycle as pillion rider on Coimbatore-Trichy https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ road. The motor cycle was driven by one Thangaraj. The motor cycle was hit by the Van insured with the appellant and in that accident, the said Krishnamoorthy and the driver of the two wheeler died. On the death of Krishnamoorthy, the mother aged 50 years, filed the claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. 4. This claim was adjudicated along with the connected claim filed by the legal heirs of Thangaraj, who drove the motor cycle involved in the accident. In support of the claim, the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. One Palanisamy, the eye witness to the accident, was examined as P.W.2. One Parameswari, the first claimant in another case on the death of the driver of the motor cycle was examined as P.W.3. Documents Exs.A1 to A13 were marked. Ex.A1 is the copy of the F.I.R. Ex.A2 is the copy of the charge sheet. Ex.A3 is the copy of the M.V.I. Report. Ex.A4 is the copy of the post- mortem certificate of deceased Krishnamoorthy. Ex.A5 is the copy of criminal court judgment. Ex.A6 series are the medical bills. Ex.A7 is the legal heirship certificate. Ex.A8 is the salary certificate. Ex.A9 is the copy of the post-mortem certificate of deceased Thangaraj. Ex.A10 is the death certificate of Arunachala Gounder. Ex.A11 is the legal heirship certificate. Ex.A12 is the authorisation letter. Ex.A13 is the salary certificate of deceased Thangaraj. No oral and documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal. 5. The finding of negligence on the part of the van driver, who is responsible for the accident and the death, and the liability fixed on the appellant insurance company to compensate the claimant is not disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant and such finding of the Tribunal is confirmed. 6. As far as the compensation is concerned, the Tribunal dealt with the same in paragraph 11 of the award in answer to point No.2. Based on Ex.A4, the post-mortem certificate, the age of the deceased was taken as 30 years. As per Ex.A8, the income certificate of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.3,750/- per month (i.e.) Rs.45,000/- per annum. Based on the age of the deceased, in terms of second schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal adopted multiplier 18 and fixed the total income of the deceased at Rs.8,10,000/- (Rs.45,000/- x 18 = Rs.8,10,000/-). After deducting 1/3 towards personal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed the loss of contribution to the dependents at Rs.6,03,000/-. The Tribunal also granted a sum of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and a sum of Rs.28,000/- towards medical expenses as per Ex.A6. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amount as compensation with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.N o. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits Rs.6,03,000/- 2 Medical expenses Rs. 28,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs. 2,000/- Total Rs.6,33,000/- rounded to Rs.6,00,000/- 7. In appeal, it is contended that the only claimant is the mother aged 50 years and the deceased is a bachelor earning member and therefore, the higher multiplier of 18 and the income fixed at Rs.3,750/- are not justified and the compensation has to be reduced. 8. In the case of death of a bachelor earning member, the possibility of the deceased getting married soon and the contribution to the dependent getting reduced is always there. The claimant will not be getting the full measure of contribution till the life time of the deceased. Therefore, lesser multiplier has to be adopted in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Bijoy Kumar Dugar - vs. - Bidya Dhar Dutta reported in 2006 AIR SCW 1116 = 2006 (3) SCC 242. Accordingly, the proper multiplier in the present case will be 10 as the mother alone is the claimant. The pecuniary loss will therefore be Rs.3,00,000/- (Rs.45,000/- x 10 – 1/3 = Rs.3,00,000/-). The sum of Rs.2,000/- granted for funeral expenses and the sum of Rs.28,000/- granted towards medical expenses are confirmed. However, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and affection on the death of her son, which the Tribunal omitted to grant. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal stands modified as follows:- Sl.No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal Amount granted by this Court 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits Rs.6,03,000/- Rs.3,00,000/- 2 Medical expenses Rs. 28,000/- Rs 28,000/- 3 Funeral expenses Rs 2,000/- Rs. 2,000/- 4 Loss of love and affection --- Rs. 20,000/- Total Rs.6,33,000/- rounded to Rs.6,00,000/- Rs.3,50,000/- 9. Since the accident happened in the year 1995 and the award was passed in the year 2002, the interest granted by the Tribunal at 9% stands confirmed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10. In the result, the civil miscellaneous appeal is partly allowed as follows:- (i) The award of the Tribunal stands reduced to Rs.3,50,000/- from Rs.6,33,000/-. (ii) The interest granted by the Tribunal at 9% stands confirmed. (iii) Learned counsel for the appellant states that entire award amount has been deposited pursuant to the order of this Court dated 6.8.2003 and the claimant has been permitted to withdraw 60% of the award amount. (iv) Though the claimant was permitted by this court to withdraw more than the amount now determined, there is no need to recover the excess amount withdrawn. (v) The appellant is entitled to withdraw the excess amount in deposit with accrued interest. (vi) There shall be no orders as to costs. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. ra/ts To 1. The Subordinate Judge (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Tiruppur. 2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section,High Court, Madras. + 1 CC to Mr.M.B.Gopalan,Advocate,SR.2871 C.M.A.No.1587 of 2003 GV(CO) EM/19.2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/