1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.09.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM C.M.A(MD)No.858 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 The Manager Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd Gopal Rao Library Building 1st floor, Town Hall Road Kumbakonam. .. Appellant/2nd Respondent Vs. 1.Ramuthayee 2.Mythili 3.Mirunalini 4.Karthikeyan .. Respondents 1 to 4/Petitioners 1 to 4 5.R.Fakrudeen Ali Ahamed .. 5th Respondent/1st Respondent 6.The Manager United India Insurance Co Ltd 12-A Kovai Road PLA Building 2nd floor Karur. .. 6th Respondent/Respondent 3 Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 15.11.2010 passed in MCOP No.315 of 2007 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Court, Karur. For Appellant : Mr.K.Bhaskaran For RR – 1 to 6 : No appearance JUDGMENT The award dated 15.11.2010 passed in MCOP No.315 of 2007 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Court, Karur is being challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The respondents 1 to 4 herein as petitioners have filed MCOP No.315 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal praying to pass an award for the amount mentioned therein, wherein the present appellant and remaining respondents have been shown as respondents. 3. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal after considering the available evidence on record has passed an award of Rs.17,20,000/- by way of compensation and the same should be paid either jointly or severally by the respondents 1 and 2. With regard https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 to quantum of compensation the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred at the instance of the second respondent as appellant. 4. Even though the respondents have been served with summonses appearance has not been made. Under the said circumstances the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of on merits on the basis of the contention put forth on the side of the appellant/second respondent. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/second respondent has repeatedly contended that even though certain documents have been filed on the side of the petitioners to prove that the deceased has conducted some business and also as an income tax assessee no relevant document has been filed for the purpose of proving either his monthly income or yearly income. But the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has erroneously fixed monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- and the monthly income fixed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is not based upon any document and therefore, the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is erroneous and the same is liable to be set aside. 6. On the side of the petitioners certain documents have been filed so as to prove that the deceased is one of the partners of Aiswarya Finance and also an income tax assessee. But as rightly pointed out on the side of the appellant/second respondent no document relating to his monthly or yearly income has been marked on the side of the petitioners. Simply because the deceased is an income tax assessee the Court cannot automatically come to a conclusion that he earned Rs.15,000/- per mensem. Since the deceased is an income tax assessee and also one of the partners of the said partnership business, definitely the petitioners can file relevant document for the purpose of showing either monthly or yearly income of the deceased. But they have not done it. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal simply on the basis that the deceased is an income tax assessee and also one of the partners of partnership business, has in suo motu fixed Rs.15,000/- per mensem as monthly income of the deceased. The approach made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is totally erroneous. To put it in short the petitioners have failed to file relevant document for the purpose of proving monthly income of the deceased. Since the approach made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is totally erroneous, the entire award passed by it, is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 7. In fine, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed without cost and the award passed in MCOP No.315 of 2007 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Court, Karur is set aside and MCOP No.315 of 2007 is remitted to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/District Court, Karur. The respondents 1 to 4/petitioners are directed to produce relevant document for the purpose of showing monthly or yearly income of the deceased. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal after considering the documents to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 be filed on the side of the respondents 1 to 4/petitioners is directed to dispose of MCOP No.315 of 2007 before the end of December 2011 and report the same to the Registry without fail. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ District Judge, Karur mj ssk/28.09.2011 /2c-3p/- C.M.A(MD)No.858 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 09.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/