Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 31.10.2008 passed in M.C.O.P.No.230 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2), Cuddalore.
2. It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 12.7.2006 at 1.05 p.m. The deceased Mohammed Ali, aged 47 years, commission agent and building material supplier, was travelling on a bicycle on the Cuddalore-Pudhucherry Road. He was hit by the bus belonging to the appellant transport corporation driven in a rash and negligent manner by the driver. In that accident the said Mohammed Ali died. On the death of Mohammed Ali; the wife aged 40 years, three daughters aged 23, 18 and 13 years respectively and two sons aged 21 and 20 years respectively filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.15 lakhs, stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month.
3. In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was examined as P.W.1. One Mohammed Nazirutheen, the eye witness to the accident was examined as P.W.2. Exs.A-1 to A-4 were marked, the details of which are as follows:-
Ex.A-1 is the copy of F.I.R., dated 12.7.2006, Ex.A-2 is the Motor Vehicle Inspector's Inspection Reports dated 13.7.2006, Ex.A-3 is the post-mortem certificate dated 13.7.2006 and Ex.A-4 is the legal heir certificate dated 3.4.2008.
Mr.Subramanian, the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus was examined as R.W.1. No document was marked on behalf of the appellant transport corporation, the respondent before the Tribunal.
4. The finding of negligence of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus and the liability fixed on the appellant transport corporation to compensate the claimants is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant. Therefore, such finding stands confirmed. The only contention raised is with regard to quantum of compensation.
5. The Tribunal in the absence of specific record with regard to the income of the deceased, taking into consideration the age and the nature of occupation as stated by the claimants and the number of dependents, fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.4,000/- per month (i.e.) Rs.48,000/- per annum. Of which 1/3 was deducted and the pecuniary loss to the family of the deceased was fixed as Rs.32,000/- per annum. The Tribunal adopted 13 multiplier and fixed the total pecuniary loss in a sum of Rs.4,16,000/- (Rs.32,000/- x 13 = Rs.4,16,000/-). In addition to that, the Tribunal granted compensation under conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum:-
Sl.No.
Head Amount granted by the Tribunal 1 Loss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents Rs.4,16,000/-
Loss of consortium to the wife on the death of her husband Rs. 10,000/-
Loss of love and affection to the daughters and sons on the death of their father Rs. 60,000/-
6. In appeal, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the income of the deceased fixed at Rs.4,000/- per month is higher and therefore, the compensation has to be reduced.
7. On going through the award, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the award of the Tribunal and to reduce the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:-
(i) The accident in this case happened on 12.7.2006.
(ii) The deceased Mohammed Ali was aged 47 years and a commission agent and building material supplier. He was supporting family consisting a wife, three daughters and two sons. All of them are very young in age. The deceased would have earned sufficient amount to support a large family consisting of his wife and five children. In this regard, the following two decisions can be taken into consideration for determining the income of the deceased:-
(a) A Division Bench of this Court in B.Anandhi vs. - Latha reported in 2002 ACJ 233(P.SATHASIVAM,J., as he then was) observed that a coolie would earn Rs.100/- per day. In that case, the accident happened in the year 1995.
(b) The Apex Court in State of Haryana and another vs. - Jasbir Kaur and others reported in 2004-1 Law Weekly, was of the view that an agriculturist would earn Rs.3,000/- per month. In that case, the accident happened in the year 1999.
In the above cited cases, the income of the deceased was taken at Rs.3,000/- per month for the year 1995 and 1999 respectively, whereas in the present case, the accident happened in the year 2006. Therefore, in this case, the income of the deceased fixed by the Tribunal is justified. There is no other issue canvassed by the counsel for the appellant.
(iii) Considering all these aspects, the total compensation granted by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs.4,91,000/- does not require any further reduction as also the interest granted at 7.5% as the accident in this case happened in the year 2006 and the award was passed in the year 2008.
(iv) The Tribunal directed that if the award amount is not deposited within the time stipulated, the appellant has to deposit the award amount with 10% interest and the excess rate of interest at 2.5% should be collected from the person concerned. The default interest granted at 10% cannot be justified as per the decision of the Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd., - vs. - Keshav Bhadur and others reported in 2004 ACJ 648. Further, default interest is not contemplated under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle's Act. In such view of the matter, the default interest is set aside and for that reason notice to respondents is not issued as the delay will cause prejudice to the claimants.
8. In the result, the award of the Tribunal in a sum of Rs.4,91,000/- with interest at 7.5% is confirmed. The default interest is set aside. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of on the above terms at the admission stage. Counsel for the appellant seeks for eight weeks' time to deposit the award amount and is granted and on such deposit, the respondents are permitted to withdraw the same as ordered and apportioned by the Tribunal. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index: No. 2.4.2009 Internet: Yes ts To The Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, (The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal), Cuddalore. R.SUDHAKAR,J. ts Judgment in C.M.A.No.805 of 2009 2.4.2009