Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd. vs Mottai Thevar and Others

R. Sudhakar, J.—The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 3.7.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.

No. 1787 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Tract Court No. II), Madurai.

On 19.1.2010, the appellant''s counsel canvassed the appeal stating that the quantum of compensation is excessive pointing out certain

discrepancy in the monthly income as found in the award. After passing the order, but before the order is signed, it was found that the error was

typographical and therefore, the matter was listed before this Court today under the caption ""for being spoken to"" and the following order is

passed today:

The only point canvassed by the learned Counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation. The finding of negligence on the part of

the driver of the appellant transport corporation bus and the liability fixed on the appellant to compensate the claimants is not in dispute and the

same is confirmed.

Heard Sri P. Subbaraj, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants.

It is a case of fatal accident. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 12.3.2005. The deceased Balu

alias Balamurugan, a bachelor aged about 23 years, said to be working as Tailor, died in the accident. The father aged 65 years, the mother aged

45 years and three minor brothers aged 17, 15 and 7 years respectively, claimed compensation in a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- stating that the

deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 4,500/- per month.

In support of the claim, the father of the deceased was examined as P.W.1 and one Mr. Nattanmai, the eye witness to the accident as P.W.2.

Exs.P-1 to P-5 were marked, the details of which are as follows:

Ex.P-1 is the copy of FIR dated 12.3.2005,

Ex.P-2 is the copy of post-mortem certificate dated 13.3.2005,

Ex.P-3 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspector''s Inspection Report dated 13.3.2005,

Ex.P-4 is the copy of charge sheet dated 30.3.2005 and

Ex.P-5 is the certificate issued by National Tailoring Institute dated 20.1.2006.

Mr. Sreenivasa Kannan, 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.

Accepting the occupation of the deceased as Tailor and on the basis of Ex.P-5 the certificate issued by Tailoring Institute, the Tribunal fixed the

income of the deceased at Rs. 100/- per day and Rs. 3,000/- per month. Based on the age of the deceased the Tribunal adopted 17 multiplier in

terms of second schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. After deducting 1/3 towards the personal expenses of the deceased, the

Tribunal fixed the pecuniary loss to the family of the deceased at Rs. 4,08,000/-. However, in the award, the Tribunal mentioned the income of the

deceased at Rs. 30,000/- instead of Rs. 3,000/- which is a clerical error. In addition, 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. Heads Amount granted

No. by the Tribunal

1 Pecuniary loss Rs.3,000/- x 12 x 17 - 1/3 Rs. 4,08,000/-

2 Loss of love and affection to the parents Rs. 20,000/-

(Rs.10,000/- x 2)

3 Loss of love and affection to three minor Rs. 15,000/-

brothers (Rs.5,000/- x 3)

4 Funeral expenses Rs. 3,000/-

5 Loss of estate Rs. 25,000/-

Total Rs. 4,71,000/-

In appeal it is contended that the multiplier adopted in this case is on the higher side. The compensation granted towards loss of estate is also on

the higher side. Therefore, the quantum of compensation is to be reduced.

On going through the award of the Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the quantum of compensation on the following reasons:

(i) The accident in this case happened on 12.3.2005. The injured claimant is aged 23 years. The income of the deceased, a tailor, fixed by the

Tribunal at Rs. 3,000/- per month is commensurate with the minimum and living wages.

(ii) The compensation granted in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each to the parents and Rs. 5,000/- each to the 3 minor brothers towards loss of love

affection is very meagre. Further, no amount has been granted towards transport expenses.

(iii) The higher compensation granted towards loss of estate can be adjusted towards loss of love and affection to the parents and minor brothers

and also transport expenses.

(iv) The compensation granted towards funeral expenses is just and reasonable.

(v) The multiplier 17 adopted by the Tribunal for the 23 year old bachelor in terms of Second Schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles

Act is justified in view of the decision in Smt. Sarla Verma and Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. reported in 2009(2)TN MAC 1

(SC). The Apex Court in Para 21 held as follows:

We therefore hold that the multiplier to be used should be as mentioned in column (4) of the Table above (prepared by applying Susamma

Thomas, Trilok Chandra and Charlie), which starts with an operative multiplier of 18 (for the age groups of 15 to 20 and 21 to 25 years), reduced

by one unit for every five years, that is M-17 for 26 to 30 years, M-16 for 31 to 35 years, M-15 for 36 to 40 years, M-14 for 41 to 45 years,

and M-13 for 46 to 50 years, then reduced by two units for every five years, that is, M-11 for 51 to 55 years, M-9 for 56 to 60 years, M-7 for

61 to 65 years and M-5 for 66 to 70 years.

Keeping in mind all these facts, this Court find no good reason to interfere with the quantum of compensation which is just and reasonable as

also the interest at 7.5% per annum.

(i) Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. There will be no order as to costs. Counsel for the

appellant seeks for eight weeks'' time to deposit the award amount and is granted and on such deposit, the respondents 1 and 2/ claimants 1 and 2

are permitted to withdraw their share with proportionate interest as apportioned by the Tribunal. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently,

connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(ii) The share of the minor respondents 3 to 5/claimants 3 to 5 shall be invested in Indian Bank, Madurai High Court Extension Counter, for a

period of three years and renewable thereafter till the minors attain majority. The mother of the minor respondents 3 to 5 is permitted to withdraw

the accrued interest in respect of the share of the minors once in three months directly from the bank and for the said purpose the second

respondent/second claimant shall open a savings bank account on the Indian Bank, Madurai High Court Extension Counter, Madurai and the

interest amount shall be transferred to the account to be maintained by the mother.

(iii) The Indian Bank, Madurai Extension Counter shall intimate to the second respondent of such deposit and confirm the same to the Tribunal that

the second respondent has been duly informed. The Tribunal to instruct the bank accordingly.

(iv) Since the deposit is in the case of minors, the Tribunal is directed to send a report containing the details of the deposit to the Madurai Bench of

Madras High Court on such deposit.