IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-10-2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3301 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Villupuram Division-III, Kancheepuram. ... Appellant/Respondent vs. 1.Smt.Vimala, 2.P.K.Arumugam. ... Respondents/petitioners Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 31.8.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.No.225 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Tiruvallur. For appellant : Mr.N.Anand ----- JUDGMENT The Tamilnadu Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 31.8.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.No.225 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Sub Court), Tiruvallur. 2. The finding of negligence and the liability to compensate the claimants is not in dispute and the same is confirmed. 3. The only contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the case of death of a 4 years old child is on the higher side. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. It is a case of fatal accident. The accident in this case happened on 21.1.2006. The deceased minor Jothika, aged 4 years, was standing near her house. She was hit by the bus belonging to the appellant transport corporation bus driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner. In that accident, she died. Mother aged 28 years and father aged 38 years filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.3 lakhs. 5. In support of the claim, the mother of the deceased girl child was examined as P.W.1. One Anjaneyan, the eye witness was examined as P.W.2. The following documents were marked on behalf of the claimants:- Ex.P-1 is the copy of F.I.R. dated 21.6.2006, Ex.P-2 is the copy of post-mortem certificate dated 22.1.2006 and Ex.P-3 is the copy of legal heir certificate dated 29.5.2006. On behalf of the appellant transport corporation, no document was marked. In paragraph 6 of the award, it is stated that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was examined. However, in the list of witnesses, it is stated no witness was examined on behalf of the appellant transport corporation. 6. As regards negligence, the Tribunal held that the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was rash and negligent, based on the testimony of eye witness P.W.2 and the F.I.R. Ex.A-1. Further, the driver in his cross examination accepted his fault. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal on this issue stands confirmed. 7. As regards the compensation, the same was decided in paragraph 7 of the award in answer to point No.2. The Tribunal took the notional income at Rs.15,000/- per annum, of which Rs.5,000/- was deducted and the loss of pecuniary benefits to the parents was fixed at Rs.10,000/- per annum. Taking into consideration, the age of the claimants, 17 multiplier was adopted and Rs.1,70,000/- was granted towards loss of pecuniary benefits to the parents of the deceased child. The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5%:- Sl. No. Heads Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits to the parents Rs.1,70,000/- 2 Transport expenses Rs. 1,000/- 3 Loss of love and affection to the parents Rs. 10,000/- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. No. Heads Amount granted by the Tribunal 4 Mental shock and agony Rs. 10,000/- 5 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- 6 Loss of happiness Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs. 2,01,000/- 8. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the compensation granted in a case of death of a child based on 17 multiplier is on the higher side. Therefore, it has to be reduced. 9. This court is not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the following reasons:- (i) The accident in this case happened in the year 2006. The age of the deceased child was 4 years. (ii) In view of the decision in Manju Devi and another – Musafir Paswan and another 2005 ACJ 99 = 2005(1) TAC 609(SC) = 2004 (2) TNMAC 262(SC), the compensation granted by the Tribunal is justified. In that case, for the death of 13 years old boy, the parents were granted a sum of Rs.2,25,000/-. (iii) The Apex Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - vs. - Satender reported in A.I.R. 2007 Supreme Court 324, in paragraph 12 expressed its view as follows:- "12. In cases of young children of tender age, in view of uncertainties abound, neither their income at the time of death nor the prospects of the future increase in their income nor chances of advancement of their income nor chances of advancement of their career are capable of proper determination on estimated basis. The reason is that at such an early age, the uncertainties in regard to their academic pursuits, achievements in career and thereafter advancement in life are so many that nothing can be assumed with reasonable certainty. Therefore, neither the income of the deceased child is capable of assessment on estimated basis nor the financial loss suffered by the parents is capable of mathematical computation." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ As per the view expressed by the Apex Court in the above case, the quantum of compensation granted in this case in a sum of Rs.2,01,000/- is just and reasonable and does not require further reduction, as also the interest granted at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2006 and the award was passed in the year 2007. 10. Finding no merits, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant prays eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount and is granted. On such deposit the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same as per order of the Tribunal. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Ts Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To The Subordinate Judge, (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal) Tiruvallur. + 1 cc to M/s. N. Anand, SR No. 60242 KSK(CO) SR/17.11.2008 Judgment in C.M.A.No.3301 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/