This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Insurance Company against the award of Rs.4,80,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Eighty Thousand only), for the death of one Muthuselvan, aged about 25 years, a driver, allegedly earning about a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), in the accident occurred on 11.12.2003, when he was riding his TVS-XL, which was knocked down by a Tata Sumo driven in a rash and negligent manner. Therefore, the claim petition.
2. The claim petition was contested by the appellant-Insurance Company and after enquiry, the Tribunal found that the driver of the Tata Sumo was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle and fixed the negligence on him and directed the appellant-Insurance Company/insurer of the offending vehicle, to pay a sum of Rs.4,80,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Eighty Thousand only) and against the said award only, the present appeal is filed.
3. Heard Mr.K.Murugesan, learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company and Mrs.J.Maria Roseline, learned Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2/claimants. There is no representation on behalf of the third respondent.
4. The only question to be decided is with regard to the quantum.
5. The learned Counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company would submit that though in the absence of any proof regarding the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) per month, the Tribunal determined a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) which is on the higher side and the deceased was a bachelor and therefore, 50% has to be deducted towards personal expenses, however, the Tribunal deducted 1/3rd amount and seeks to reduce the same.
6. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2/claimants would submit that no amount towards future prospects has been added and the multiplier adopted is according to the age of the mother and therefore, she seeks to increase the multiplier.
7. Even though a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) was sought for as monthly income of the deceased, the Tribunal fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as monthly income of the deceased based on the evidence of P.W.1 as well as P.W.3 ? employer of the deceased that he was working as a driver and earning Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six Thousand only) per month, apart from Rs.200/- (Rupees Two Hundred only) per day while he was on duty. Therefore, the Tribunal based on the above evidence, determined the monthly income at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), which is in consonance with the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Smt.Kalpana and others reported in 2007 (1) TN MAC 1 (SC), in which, the Honourable Supreme Court determined the monthly income of a driver, who died in the accident occurred on 07.06.1999, at Rs.4,500/- (Rupees Four Thousand and Five Hundred only) in the absence of any material evidence to prove the income and after deducting 1/3rd amount towards his personal expenses, arrived at the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) per month.
8. Whereas, in this case, the accident occurred on 11.12.2003, i.e., after four years of the accident as in the above judgment and therefore, a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) determined by the Tribunal as monthly income of the deceased is very reasonable.
9. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2/claimants, no amount towards future prospects was added by the Tribunal.
10. The age of the deceased as per Ex.P.4 ? post-mortem certificate is 27 years and the appropriate multiplier to be adopted is 17. Whereas the Tribunal based on the age of the mother of the deceased, applied the multiplier '11' and therefore, the multiplier is determined at 17.
11. Since the age of the deceased was 27 years at the time of the accident, 50% has to be added towards future prospects as per the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Rajesh and others v. Rajbir Singh and others reported in (2013) 9 Supreme Court Cases 54. Accordingly, the monthly income of the deceased would be Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) [Rs.5,000/- + Rs.2,500/-].
12. The Tribunal erroneously deducted 1/3rd amount towards personal expenses as pointed out by Mr.K.Murugesan, learned Counsel for the appellant- Insurance Company and the appropriate deducted would be 50% as the deceased was a bachelor at the time of the accident. Accordingly, the monthly contribution of the deceased would be Rs.3,750/- (Rupees Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty only) [Rs.7,500/- - Rs.3,750/-] and the loss of income would be Rs.7,65,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs and Sixty Five Thousand only) [Rs.3,750/- X 12 X 17].
13. A sum of Rs.6,906/- (Rupees Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Six only) awarded by the Tribunal towards medical bills as per Ex.P.7, is confirmed.
14. A sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) awarded by the Tribunal towards transportation charges and hospital expenses during the treatment period, is confirmed.
15. A sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses is confirmed.
16. However, only a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of love and affection, is low and the same is enhanced to a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the respondents 1 and 2/claimants.
17. No amount was awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of estate and hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) under the said head.
18. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7.5% per annum remains unaltered.
19. Accordingly, the respondents 1 and 2/claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.8,51,906/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Nine Hundred and Six only) and rounded off to Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till date of realisation and proportionate costs.
20. Even though this appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Insurance Company against the award of Rs.4,80,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Eighty Thousand only), awarded by the Tribunal, this Court, on reappreciating the evidence and applying the current proposition of law, suo motu enhances the compensation to Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) even in the absence of appeal/cross appeal invoking Order 41 Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure and
Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for which, this Court has got power and jurisdiction as declared by the Honourable Supreme Court in Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh and others reported in 2004 (2) TNMAC 398 (SC) : 2003 (2) SCC 274.
21. In the result,
(i) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed;
(ii) The respondents 1 and 2/claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.8,51,906/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty One Thousand Nine Hundred and Six only) and rounded off to Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till date of realisation and proportionate costs;
(iii) Both the respondents 1 and 2/claimants 1 and 2 are equally entitled to the above compensation amount along with accrued interest and costs, at the rate of 50 : 50;
(iv) The respondents 1 and 2/claimants 1 and 2 are directed to submit their Personal Savings Bank Account Numbers along with the copies of their passbooks to the Tribunal forthwith;
(v) The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount along with accrued interest and costs, less the amount deposited, if any, to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.2180 of 2005, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum ? Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No.2, Tiruchirappalli, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment;
(vi) On such deposit, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the respective share amounts of the respondents 1 and 2/claimants 1 and 2 directly to their Personal Savings Bank Account Numbers, as per the apportionment made by this Court, through RTGS/NEFT system, after getting their Account Details, within a period of two weeks thereafter;
(vii) The respondents 1 and 2/claimants 1 and 2 are directed to pay the additional Court Fees, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; and
(vii) In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - cum ?
Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No.2, Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai..