AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T. Mathivanan, J.—Challenge is made in this appeal to the award of Rs. 3,83,000/- dated 25.03.2008 and made in M.C.O.P. No. 119 of 2006, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Pudukottai by the second Respondent/Insurance Company.
The facts which are absolutely necessary for the disposal of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal may be summarized briefly as follows:
That on 10.07.2005, at about 05.00 a.m, near Kainangkulakarai at Tiruchy-Pudukottai Main Road, the AVM Parcel Van bearing Registration No. TN-55-F-8769, in which the deceased Marimuthu was travelling as a cleaner, went out of the control of the driver and hit against the rear side of a stationed Lorry bearing Registration No. TCS.6192, belonging to the fifth Respondent herein and on account of this accident, the deceased Marimuthu had sustained severe injuries and immediately he was taken to Pudukottai Government Headquarters Hospital and thereafter, he had succumbed to injuries while he was on treatment. Hence, the Respondents/claimants 1 to 3 being the mother and the brothers of the deceased had filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal District Judge), Pudukottai in M.C.O.P. No. 119 of 2006, claiming a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-.
The first and third Respondents therein never chosen to resist the claim petition. On the other hand, the Appellant/Insurance Company being the second Respondent therein had contested the claim petition on the ground that the accident was not taken place due to the rashness and negligence on the part of the fourth Respondent/first Respondent''s driver, but it was occurred only on the wrong committed by the fifth Respondent/third Respondent''s driver. It was also contended that the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- as claimed by the claimants is exaggerated and that if at all any award is to be passed that might be passed against the fifth Respondent/third Respondent.
On evaluation of the evidences and other materials available on record, the Tribunal had determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,000/- and on considering the age of the deceased (35 years) at the time of occurrence, the multiplier ''13'' was taken into account for arriving at the quantum. Ultimately a sum of Rs. 3,83,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal, directing the second Respondent to pay this amount to the claimant with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a from the date of petition till date of realization.
Being aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal, the second Respondent/Insurance Company therein stands before this Court with this appeal.
When the appeal came up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the Appellant has vehemently attacked the evidence given by P.W.3, who is the Manager of AVM Parcel Company as well as Ex.P8 pay certificate said to have been issued by P.W.3.
On perusal of the testimony of P.W.3 and the documentary evidence under Ex.P8, it is established that the deceased Marimuthu was working as a Cleaner in AVM Parcel Service. However, the evidence in respect of the payment of Rs. 5,000/- i.e., Rs. 2,500/- mensem + daily batta at Rs. 100/- for 25 days alone has been resisted by the learned Counsel for the Appellant.
In support of his argument, the learned Counsel for the Appellant has placed reliance upon the decisions in Sarla Verma and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in (2009) 4 M LJ 997 (SC) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Laxman Iyer and Anr. reported in 2004 (1) TN MAC (SC) 16.
In Sarla Verma and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in (2009) 4 M LJ 997 (SC), it is observed that where the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents, the deduction follows a different principle. In regard to bachelors, normally, 50% is deducted as personal and living expenses, because it is assumed that a bachelor would tend to stand more on himself. Even otherwise, there is also the possibility of his getting married in a short time, in which event the contribution to the parents and siblings is likely to be cut drastically.
In Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Laxman Iyer and Anr. reported in 2004 (1) TN MAC (SC) 16, it has been held that the age of the parents could be taken into account for calculating the compensation when the deceased was a bachelor.
On the principles laid down in the above said decisions, this Court is of the view that the age of the first Respondent/claimant, who is the mother of the deceased can be taken into account for selecting the appropriate multiplier as well as arriving at a just compensation.
On a cursory perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal, the award has been passed under following heads:
for loss of income of the family
Rs.3,51,000/-
for loss of love and affection
for the first respondent/claimant
Rs. 15,000/-
for loss of love and affection
for the respondents/claimants 2 &3
Rs. 15,000/-
for funeral expenses
Rs. 2,000/-
Rs.3,83,000/-
Insofar as the present appeal is concerned, as discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, the age of the mother was 50 years at the time of occurrence. Hence, as decided in Sarla Verma''s case the multiplier of ''13'' would be more appropriate. The monthly income of the deceased has been determined by the Tribunal at Rs. 4,000/-. Since P.W.3, being the Manager of AVM Parcel Service has not produced any other documentary evidence to support his evidence, this Court is in concurrence with the view of the Tribunal in determining the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,000/-. Accordingly, the annual income of the deceased would be Rs. 48,000/-(Rs. 4,000 X 12). After deducting 50% towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, the remaining one half would be Rs. 24,000/-.Applying the multiplier of ''13'', the loss of income of the family would be Rs. 3,12,000/- (Rs. 24,000 X 3).
Apart from this, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/-towards the loss of love and affection for the first Respondent/claimant which could be reduced to Rs. 10,000/-. Similarly a sum of Rs. 15,000/-awarded by the Tribunal towards the loss of love and affection in respect of the Respondents/claimants 2 & 3 could also be reduced to Rs. 10,000/-. In addition to this, Rs. 5,000/- towards funeral expenses and another amount of Rs. 5,000/- towards transportation charges can be granted. Accordingly, the Respondents/claimants 1 to 3 are entitled to get a sum of Rs. 3,42,000/-.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. The award of Rs. 3,83,000/has been reduced to Rs. 3,42,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. The Appellant/Insurance Company is directed to pay this amount with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. No costs.