IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 29.03.2010 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI and THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL C.M.A.No.4002 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd, Division No.2, No.37, Mettupalayam Post, Coimbatore – 641 043. ..Appellant/Respondent vs 1.Thambanna Gounder (died) 2.Pappathi @ Pazhaniammal ..Respondents/Petitioners (R2 is recorded as L.R of the deceased first respondent vide order dated 26.03.2010 made in C.M.A.No.4002 of 2008) Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 04.03.2008 in M.C.O.P.No.1148 of 2006 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.V)), Coimbatore at Tiruppur. For Appellant : Mr.N.Anand For Respondents : Ms.Srividhya for Mr.A.S.Mohamed Rafi JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.BANUMATHI, J.) Being aggrieved by the award of compensation and quantum of compensation of Rs.16,39,000/-, the Transport Corporation has filed this appeal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The brief facts are that on 30.08.2006 at about 17.45 hours when the deceased was proceeding to Tiruppur in his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 39 L 7168, near Sangilipallam, the bus bearing Registration No.TN 33 N1677 belonging to the appellant- Transport Corporation, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the deceased. In the accident, the deceased sustained injuries and he was taken to Government Hospital, Tiruppur. Thereafter, he was shifted to K.M.C.H. Hospital, where, he succumbed to injuries. A criminal case was registered in Crime No.1392/2006 on the file of Tirupur South Police Station. The deceased was aged 23 years at the time of accident and he was running a Banian company and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. Alleging that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, parents of the deceased have filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming a compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-. 3.Before the Tribunal, the second claimant/mother of the deceased examined herself as P.W.1 and eye witness was examined as P.W.2. On the side of the claimants, Exs.P1 to P14 were marked. On the side of the respondent, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. 4.Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has held that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver. Placing reliance upon the SARAL Forms submitted by the deceased Senthil Kumar to the Income Tax Department, the Tribunal has taken the average monthly income of the deceased at Rs.13,308/-. After deducting 1/3rd amount for the personal expenses of the deceased, the Tribunal calculated the loss of dependency at Rs.1,06,467/-. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.16,39,000/- as under: Loss of dependency .. Rs.13,84,071.00 (Rs.1,06,467 x 13) Loss of love and affection .. Rs. 5,000.00 Funeral expenses .. Rs. 5,000.00 Medical expenses .. Rs. 2,45,000.00 = = = = = = = = Total Rs.16,39,071.00 = = = = = = = = (rounded off to Rs.16,39,000/-) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.The claimants are father and mother of the deceased. After the filing of claim petition, father/first claimant Thambanna Gounder died. In this appeal, the first claimant was also shown as respondent. On memo filed by the claimants, death of Thambanna Gounder/first claimant was recorded and the second respondent – mother of the deceased was recognised as legal representative of the deceased first respondent also. 6.The manner of accident and as to who was negligent and the liability are not in dispute. Only the quantum of compensation awarded to the second claimant is in dispute. 7.Learned counsel for the appellant-Transport Corporation submitted that the first claimant-father was aged 55 years and the second claimant was aged 48 years and while so, the Tribunal erred in adopting multiplier of 13 based on the age of the mother only and the compensation of Rs.13,84,071/- awarded under the head "loss of income" is highly excessive. It was further contended that the medical bills produced by the claimant for the treatment taken by the deceased for a sum of Rs.2,95,045/- less Rs.50,000/- which the deceased got by way of insurance reimbursement is highly excessive. Learned counsel submitted that the quantum of compensation of Rs.16,39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is highly excessive and unsustainable and prayed for reduction of compensation. 8.We have also heard Ms.Srividhya, learned counsel for the respondents. Drawing our attention to the judgment of the Tribunal, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the deceased was running Banian company and that he was an income tax assessee. She further submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable one. 9.The deceased Senthil Kumar was aged 23 years and he was running a banian company under the name and style Swetha Knits. Ex.P7 is the driving licence of the deceased in which his date of birth was shown as 04.04.1984. By running banian company, the deceased was earning good income and he was also an income tax assessee. Ex.P9 is the PAN Card issued to the deceased Senthil Kumar. The deceased has submitted periodical income tax returns to the concerned authorities. Ex.P10 is the income tax return submitted by the deceased for the assessment year 2004-2005 in which the taxable income was shown as Rs.88,367/-. Ex.P11 is the income tax return for the period 2005-2006 in which the deceased has shown taxable income at Rs.1,50,404/-. In Ex.P13 income tax return for the assessment year 2006-2007, the income of the deceased was shown as Rs.2,40,625/-. From Ex.P12, it is also seen that the deceased has paid advance tax. The Tribunal has taken the total income of the deceased Senthil Kumar for the assessment year 2004-2005 to 2006-2007 at Rs.4,79,396/- and thereafter calculated the average at Rs.1,59,700/- and the Tribunal has taken the same as income of the deceased at Rs.1,59,700/- per https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ annum. Deducting 1/3rd amount for personal expenses, the Tribunal has calculated the contribution of the deceased to the family at Rs.1,06,467/-. 10.The first claimant/father was aged 55 years and the second claimant/mother was aged 48 years. Taking the age of the mother and as per the Second Schedule, the Tribunal has adopted the multiplier of 13. Placing reliance upon Bijoy Kumar Dugar Vs. Bidya Dhar Dutta and Others ((2006) 3 SCC 242), learned counsel for the appellant- Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal ought to have taken the age of both father and mother and ought to have adopted multiplier of 12 and the multiplier of 13 adopted by the Tribunal is on the higher side. 11.The first claimant/father was aged 55 years and the second claimant/mother was aged 48 years. In our considered view, the Tribunal was justified in adopting multiplier of 13 based on the age of the second claimant/mother - 48 years. 12.Coming to the total loss of dependency of the claimants, the Tribunal has calculated the pecuniary loss to the parents of the deceased by taking the income at Rs.1,06,467/- for the entire period of 13 years. The deceased, being aged 23 years, after some time would have married and after his marriage, his love and affection also would have been diverted to his wife and children. The care showered by the deceased would have been not only upon the parents but also would have been shared by the wife and children. This aspect was not kept in view by the Tribunal. Having regard to the age of the deceased Senthil Kumar – 23 years, it would be appropriate to take the pecuniary loss of the family at Rs.1,06,467/- for seven multiplier/years. For the balance six multiplier/years, the deceased would have contributed 50% of his income to his parents. However, since we are not taking into account the future prospects of the deceased for the balance six multiplier/years, the contribution to the parents is taken at Rs.60,000/- per annum. The total loss of dependency of the claimants is calculated at Rs.11,05,269/- (Rs.1,06,467/- x 7 plus Rs.60,000/- x 6 = Rs.11,05,269/-). The total loss of dependency is calculated at Rs.11,05,269/-. 13.Insofar as the conventional damages, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- for loss of love and affection and another sum of Rs.5,000/- for funeral expenses and the quantum awarded under those heads is reasonable and the same is maintained. After the accident, the deceased Senthil Kumar was given intensive treatment in Kovai Medical Centre Hospital for a period of about 16 days and he later succumbed to injuries. A sum of Rs.2,95,045/- was spent for medical expenses. A sum of Rs.50,000/- was claimed as medical insurance reimbursement and taking the same into account, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,45,000/- for medical expenses and the same is maintained. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 14.The total compensation awarded to the second claimant/ mother is reduced to Rs.13,60,269/- as under: Loss of dependency .. Rs.11,05,269.00 (Rs.7,45,269 + Rs.3,60,000/-) Loss of love and affection .. Rs. 5,000.00 Funeral expenses .. Rs. 5,000.00 Medical expenses .. Rs. 2,45,000.00 = = = = = = = = Total Rs.13,60,269.00 = = = = = = = = 15.The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. Following the consistent view taken by the Supreme Court, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7.5% per annum is confirmed. 16.The quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.1148 of 2005 is reduced to Rs.13,60,269/-, which is payable with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 17.It was stated before us that the appellant-Transport Corporation has already deposited a consolidated sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, out of which, the second claimant/second respondent Pappathi @ Pazhaniammal has withdrawn Rs.5,00,000/-. The second claimant is permitted to withdraw the balance compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- immediately. The appellant-Transport corporation is directed to deposit the balance amount of the reduced compensation along with accrued interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 18.On such deposit, the second claimant/second respondent is permitted to withdraw the entire compensation amount. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar mmi https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1. The Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.V (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Coimbatore at Tiruppur. 2. The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, High Court, Madras. + 1 c.c. to Mr. N. Anand, Advocate. S.R.No.21276. + 1 c.c. to Mr. S.S. Swaminathan, Advocate. S.R.No.20450. C.M.A.No.4002 of 2008 RJ (CO) GSK 07.06.2010. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/