IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :24-7-2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.1536 of 2000 1.M/s.Sree Nivas Transports Pondicherry-1. 2.M/s.National Insurance Company Ltd., Pondicherry-605 001. ... Appellants/Respondent -vs- 1.Chitra 2.Balasubramanian 3.Krishnaveni 4.Kumarasamy, 5.Alamelu 6.Duraisamy 7.Minor Sundararaman represented by Ist respondent herein ... Respondents/Petitioners Civil miscellaneous appeals preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and decree dated dated 19.4.1999 made in MCOP No.488 of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) at Cuddalore. For Appellants :Mr.T.M.Venkatraman For Respondents :Mr.G.R.Swaminathan JUDGMENT The appeal has been filed jointly by the owner of the vehicle and the insurer. 2. The only contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation in the case of death. 3. The accident in this case happened on 14.3.1994 at about 9.30 P.M. in Anna Bridge, Thiruppapuliyur. The deceased Dr.Muthukumarasamy was riding his motor-cycle on the Anna Bridge, a tipper lorry bearing registration No.PY-01/B-6211 insured with the 2nd appellant, hit him. In that accident the said aid Dr.Muthukumarasamy died. 4. The widow of the deceased aged about 26 years, father of the deceased aged about 58 years, mother of the deceased aged about 50 years, two brother of the deceased aged about 24 years and 19 years respectively, sister of the deceased aged about 21 years and minor son https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the deceased aged about six months, have filed a petition claiming compensation for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. According to the claimants the deceased Dr.Muthukumarasamy was a Acupuncture Specialist and was earning a sum of Rs.4000/- per month at the time of accident. He was conducting a Chinese Acupuncture College and Research Training Centre. 5. In support of their claim, the widow of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. and an eye witness namely Thiru.Padmanabhan was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A1 to A14 were marked on the side of the claimants. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the appellants/respondents. 6. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of lorry and the appellant's liability to compensate the claimants is not disputed and the same is confirmed. 7. The only contention of the appellants' counsel is on the quantum of compensation. The tribunal discussed the issue relating to the compensation in para No.19 onwards, in answer at point No.2, The income of the deceased as stated by PW1 is Rs.6000/- per month. Several documents were relied on by the claimants. However on going through the materials available on record it is clear that the deceased was not a Graduate in medicines on a regular course but obtained the certificate from an open International University. There was no material to show that he held a recognized degree from a recognised institution. 8. The tribunal after discussing all the evidence on record fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.5000/- per month. The tribunal deducted a sum of Rs.500/- towards profession expenses of the deceased and determined the sum of Rs.4500/- per month as contribution to the family. The age of the deceased at the time of accident was fixed as 28 years based on the transfer certificate and post-mortem certificate of the deceased. The tribunal thereafter applied unit method and deducted Rs.600/- towards personal expenses of the deceased and the contribution to the family was fixed at Rs.3900/- per month. The annual contribution was fixed at Rs.46,800/-. The tribunal adopted 18 multiplier and fixed the pecuniary loss of income to the family of the deceased at Rs.8,42,400/-. The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of consortium to the widow of the deceased, a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the loss of love and affection to the child in womb, a sum of Rs.5000/- each to the other claimants namely parents, two brothers and sister and a sum of Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses. Totally a sum of Rs.9,07,400/- with 12% interest and 15% default interest was awarded. 9. The contention of the appellant is that the income of the deceased fixed at Rs.5000/- per month is not justified. The deceased was not a qualified Doctor and the proof of income of the deceased submitted before the Tribunal, is in the realm of conjectures and surmises. Further from the income of Rs.5000/- a meager sum of Rs.500/- alone was deducted towards professional expenses. The unit method applied is also not correct as the deceased should have spent more amount for personal expenses. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the case of death of 28 years old earning member, 18 multiplier is on the higher side. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants submitted that the award passed by the tribunal is just and reasonable and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 11. The first contention with regard to the income of the deceased has much force. Though several certificates have been produced to support the profession and to prove the income of the deceased, on perusal of the same, it is clear that the certificate was given by an open university. The deceased was practicing as an Acupuncture Specialist and he is not a qualified Doctor. There is no proper proof with regard to the actual income of the deceased except the oral evidence. Therefore in the absence of specific record, and considering the fact that the accident happened in the year 1994, the income of the deceased can be fixed at Rs.3500/- per month. The unit method which was adopted by the tribunal in this case will not apply as the actual dependents are only the wife and the minor child and the parents. In any event the brothers are there to take care of the parents. 12. The deceased is a practicing Acupuncture Specialist needs more amount for personal expenses and profession expenses. Therefore towards personal expenses 1/3 of the income has to be deducted i.e. Rs.1166/- per month and after deduction the balance amount of Rs.2334/- per month will be the contribution to the family. Since the deceased was aged about 28 years and supporting the family consisting of wife aged about 26 years, a minor child 6 months old and aged parents, the 18 multiplier adopted by the Tribunal in this case is accepted. 13. The loss of pecuniary benefits to the family will be Rs.2334 X 12 X 18 = Rs.5,04,144/-. The sum of Rs.25000/- granted for loss of consortium to the wife, the sum of Rs.10000/- granted to the minor children for loss of love and affection on the death of the father and the sum of Rs.5000/- to each of the other claimants, the sum of Rs.5000/- towards funeral expenses awarded by the Tribunal are confirmed. 14. In the result the total compensation of Rs.9,07,400/- awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to a sum of Rs.5,49,144/-. The interest awarded at 12% stands confirmed since the accident happened in the year 1994 and the award is of the year 1999 and the default interest of 15% is set aside as there is no provision in the Act to award default interest. 15. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the entire award amount has been deposited. The claimants are entitled to withdraw the amount in the following proportion: i) It is stated that 50% of the award amount has already been withdrawn. Out of the balance amount as modified by this court, the widow of the deceased is entitled to withdraw 25% of the balance amount with proportionate interest and entire cost. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ii) 75% of the balance amount with proportionate interest will go to the minor child and he will be entitled to withdraw the same as and when he is declared major. iii) The share of the minor 7th respondent/7th claimant shall be invested in any nationalised bank proximate to the place of the residence of the first respondent/first claimant for a period of three years and renewable thereafter till the minor attains majority. The mother of the minor 7th respondent is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest in respect of the share of the minor once in three months directly from the bank and for the said purpose the first respondent/first claimant shall open a savings bank account on the same branch and the interest amount shall be transferred to the account to be maintained by the mother. (iv) The nationalized bank to which the amount will be deposited, shall intimate to the first respondent/first claimant of such deposit and confirm the same to the Tribunal that the first claimant has been duly informed. The Tribunal to inform the bank accordingly. (v) Since the deposit is in the case of minor, the Tribunal is directed to send a report containing the details of the deposit to the High Court on such deposit. vi) Excess amount in deposit can be withdrawn by the second appellant with accrued interest. Vii) Consequently the connected C.M.P.Nos.14583 and 18843 of 2000 are closed. Vii) There will be no order as to cost in this appeal. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar vk To: 1. The Subordinate Judge, (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal) Cuddalore. 2. The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. 1 cc To Mr.G.R.Swaminathan, Advocate, SR.40252. 1 cc To Mr.K.S.Narasimhan, Advocate, SR.39878. CMA Nos.1536 of 2000 KA(CO) RVL 03.11.2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/