AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Vimala, J.—Originally, the claim petition has been filed by the wife, children and parents of the deceased, claiming compensation in respect of the death of the deceased Kottaisamy.
The deceased was aged 30 at the time of accident and he was doing the work of fitter and an agriculturist. He died in an accident that took place on 08.02.2007. The parents died during the pendency of the claim petition. The only surviving claimants are the wife and the minor children of the deceased.
The Tribunal, while quantifying the compensation, has taken the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- and deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses, has taken the monthly dependency at Rs. 3,375/-. Adopting the multiplier of 17, the loss of dependency has been calculated at Rs.6,88,500/-.
The first claimant/ the first petitioner in the claim petition, has been awarded loss of consortium at Rs.20,000/-. Awarding a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cremation expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of love and affection, the total compensation has been arrived at Rs. 7,33,500/-.
The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is challenged by the Insurance Company on the ground that the deduction to be made is only 1/3rd and not 1/4th, as at the time of passing the award only few claimants were surviving. This contention cannot be accepted as the contribution made by the deceased while he was alive, is the relevant factor and not contribution after his death which would go to the claimants. In other words, the death of some of the claimants would enure to the benefit of rest of the claimants and not to the benefit of the Insurance Company. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses and not 1/3rd.
The learned counsel for the claimants pointed out that the amount awarded towards loss of love and affection is meagre, considering the age of the minor children, who were aged 6 and 4 respectively, at the time of accident. But no cross objection has been filed by the claimants. When the death is of the year 2007 and the appeal is heard in 2014, it may not be proper to enhance the amount without any cross objection. Therefore, the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal is confirmed.
The Tribunal has given a finding that there is breach of terms and conditions of the policy with regard to driving license and therefore, it has ordered pay and recovery. It is the grievance of the Insurance Company that the guidelines given in the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shri Nanjappan and Others, , ought to have been directed to be followed by the Insurance Company, which has not been expressly given in the judgment itself. It is made clear that it is open to the Insurance Company to take proceedings in accordance with the dictum laid down in the Nanjappan''s case, stated supra.
With the above observations, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
It is stated by the counsel for the Insurance Company that already the Insurance Company has deposited Rs.5,00,000/- with proportionate accrued interest and costs. Therefore, the appellant / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation as confirmed by this Court, less the amount already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
On such deposit, the shares of the minors as apportioned by the Tribunal, shall be in the bank deposit, as directed by the Tribunal and the mother of the minor children shall withdraw the accrued interest once in three months from the bank directly. The share payable to the first claimant is permitted to be withdrawn by her. The shares payable to the fourth and fifth respondents shall be payable to the concerned legal heirs, on making necessary application before the concerned Court.