IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-3-2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.603 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd., Registered Office, No.21, Patullos Road, Chennai-600 002. ... Appellant/3rd Respondent vs. 1.Manjula, 2.A.Kalidoss, 3.R.Ravindran. (Respondents 2 and 3 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Hence notice may be dispensed with) ... Respondents/Petitioner and respondents 1 and 2 Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the award and decree dated 18.11.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.802 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Special Court for E.C. Act Cases), Coimbatore. For appellant : Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the M/s.Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company, challenging the award 18.11.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.802 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Special Court for E.C. Act Cases), Coimbatore. 2. It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 22.2.2007. The deceased B.Sivakumar, aged 15 years, working as a helper in M/s.Swagat Precision Products, was travelling on his bicycle. One Vaidhiyalingam was behind him in a bicycle. The lorry belonging to the third respondent herein and insured with the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ appellant herein, driven by the second respondent herein in a rash and negligent manner coming from the opposite direction, hit the cyclist. The lorry ran over the said Sivakumar. In that accident the said Sivakumar died on the spot. The mother of the deceased filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.5 lakhs stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month. 3. In support of the claim, the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. Mr.Vaithiyalingam, the eye witness to the accident and who gave the complaint to the police was examined as P.W.2. Exs.P-1 to P-12 were marked on behalf of the claimant, the details of which are as follows:- Ex.P-1 is the copy of FIR dated 22.2.2007, Ex.P-2 is the copy of final report dated 18.3.2007, Ex.P-3 is the copy of rough sketch dated 22.2.2007, Ex.P-4 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection Report dated 22.2.2007, Ex.P-5 is the copy of post-mortem certificate dated 22.2.2007, Ex.P-6 is the death certificate dated 18.4.2007, Ex.P-7 is the copy of death certificate dated 30.11.2006, Ex.P-8 is the copy of legal heir certificate dated 25.7.2008, Exs.P-9 and P-10 are the authorisation dated 13.6.2008 and 28.7.2008, Ex.P-11 is the salary certificate dated 10.5.2007 and Ex.P-12 is the school transfer certificate dated 20.9.2008. No oral or documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant insurance company, the 3rd respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry insured with the appellant insurance company, as responsible to the accident and the death and consequent liability fixed on the appellant insurance company to compensate the claimant is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant in the appeal and the same is confirmed. 5. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the same was dealt with by the Tribunal in paragraph 6 of the award in answer to point No.2. Based on school transfer certificate Ex.P-12, the Tribunal fixed the age of the deceased at 16 years. Based on Exs.P-9, Ex.P-10 and Ex.P-11, the Tribunal came to conclusion that the deceased was working in M/s.Swagat Precision Products Private Limited company and was earning a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month. The Tribunal after deducting a sum of Rs.750/- towards personal expenses of the deceased, fixed the loss of contribution to the family of the deceased at Rs.1,250/- per month (i.e.) Rs.15,000/- per annum. Based on the legal heir certificate Ex.P-8, the Tribunal fixed the age of the claimant as 45 years and adopted 15 multiplier for the purpose of determining the compensation. Accordingly, the Tribunal fixed the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ loss of pecuniary benefits to the mother of the deceased at Rs.2,25,000/- (Rs.15,000/- x 15 = Rs.2,25,000/-). The Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with 7.5% interest as hereunder:- Sl. No. Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of compensation to the mother on the death of her son Rs.2,25,000/- 2 Funeral expenses Rs. 5,000/- 3 Transport expenses Rs. 5,000/- 4 Loss of protection to the mother on the death of her son Rs. 15,000/- 5 Loss of love and affection to the mother on the death of her son Rs. 10,000/- Total Rs.2,60,000/- 6. The contention of the appellant's counsel is that the multiplier of 15 adopted by the Tribunal is high. Therefore, the quantum of compensation is to be reduced. 7. On going through the award, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the award of the Tribunal on the above contention and to reduce the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:- (i) The accident in this case happened on 22.2.2007. (ii) In this case, the deceased was 16 years at the time of accident. The deceased was working in a private company and was earning a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month. The Tribunal after deducting a sum of Rs.750/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased, fixed the loss of contribution to the dependent mother at Rs.1,250/- per month (i.e.) Rs.15,000/- per annum. Based on the age of the mother of the deceased, the Tribunal adopted 15 multiplier and granted a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- as compensation. (iii) In Manju Devi and another - vs.– Musafir Paswan and another reported in 2005 ACJ 99 = 2005(1) TAC 609(SC) = 2004(2) TNMAC 262 (SC), a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- was granted as compensation for the death of a 13 years old student. The accident in that case happened in the year 1998. The Apex Court in The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay - vs. - Shri Laxman Iyer and another reported in 2004 ACJ 53 = 2004(1) TN MAC (SC) 16 = 2004 (2) LW 15 = (2004)1 M.L.J. 82(S.C.), on the death of 18 year old student and on a claim for compensation filed by father and mother aged 47 and 43 years respectively, the Apex Court fixed the total compensation in a sum of Rs.3,60,000/-. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (iv) In this case, the father already died. Now the mother lost the support, love and affection from her son for the rest of her life. Hence, even if the multiplier 15 adopted by the Tribunal is high, the compensation granted in a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards pecuniary loss is justified in view of the above said decisions. In any event considering the cost of living and rise in price the compensation is not excessive. Considering the annual income of Rs.24,000/- in this case, the compensation even as per the structured formula set out in the second schedule in terms of Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 will be more than the amount granted in this case. (v) The other amounts granted under conventional heads are not disputed and the same are confirmed. (vi)Considering the above aspects the total compensation granted in a sum of Rs.2,60,000/- by the Tribunal does not require any further reduction as also the interest granted at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2007 and the award is of the year 2008. 8. Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant seeks eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount and is granted and on such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. ts To The Additional District Judge, Special Court for E.C. Act Cases, (Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal) Coimbatore. C.M.A.No.603 of 2009 CK(CO) EM/3.4.09 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/