| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 5918
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Case No : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 584 of 2013 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH |
| Parties : V. Kanagarani & Others Versus V. Krishnan & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Appellants: Y. Jayanthi Bhaskar, for J. Mahalingam, Advocates. For the Respondents: R2, K. Vinod, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 03-08-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 173 -
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
2. Catch Words:
- Compensation
- Loss of expectation
- Loss of income/dependency
- Loss of consortium
- Loss of love and affection
- Loss of estate
- Transport charges
- Multiplier
- Future prospects
- Personal expenses
- Interest
3. Summary:
The appellants challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s award of Rs. 11,00,000 for the death of Velvendhan. The Tribunal had fixed monthly income at Rs. 9,000 based on tax returns and applied a multiplier of 11, despite the deceased being 49 years old. The Court found the multiplier should be 13 and added 25% for future prospects, correcting the personal‑expense deduction to 1/4. Consequently, the loss‑of‑dependency component was increased to Rs. 13,16,172. The Court also enhanced loss of consortium to Rs. 40,000 and awarded Rs. 5,000 each for loss of estate and transport charges. All other heads remained unchanged, raising the total compensation to Rs. 16,54,172. The insurance company was directed to pay the enhanced amount with interest, subject to procedural compliance.
4. Conclusion:
Appeal Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment dated 27.12.2007 made in MCOP No.401 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court IV, Poonamallee.)
1. This appeal has been filed against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court IV, Poonamallee, dated 27.12.2007 in M.C.O.P.No.401 of 2005 wherein the claimants are seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. The first claimant is the wife and the claimants 2 to 4 are daughters of the deceased Velvendhan. The case of the claimants is that on 14.10.2000, the deceased was riding a two wheeler at GST road and at about 21.30 hours, the offending vehicle, a tipper lorry, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two wheeler, as a result of which the deceased was thrown out of the vehicle and succumbed to the injuries. A First Information Report came to be registered against the driver of the offending vehicle in Crime No.737 of 2000. It is under these circumstances, the claim petition came to be filed before the Tribunal.
3. The Tribunal, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, came to a conclusion that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. Having rendered the above finding, the Tribunal proceeded to determine the compensation amount in the following manner:
Sl. No.
| Compensation awarded under the head
| Amount (in Rs.)
| 1.
| Loss of expectation
| 7,92,000/-
| 2.
| Funeral expenses
| 5,000/-
| 3.
| Medical and ambulance transport
| 2,83,000/-
| 4.
| Loss of consortium
| 10,000/-
| 5.
| Loss of love and affection
| 10,000/-
| | Total
| 11,00,000/-
|
The above compensation was directed to be paid along with interest at 7.5% p.a. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed by the claimants seeking compensation.
4. Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel for second respondent insurance company. This Court also considered the materials available on record and carefully went through the award passed by the Tribunal.
5. The bone of contention is regarding monthly income fixed by the Tribunal while calculating the compensation under the head ‘loss of income/dependency’. It is contended that on the side of the appellants that as per Exs.P10 and P11, the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income at Rs.15,000/- whereas the Tribunal had fixed only a sum of Rs.9,000/-, which is on the lower side. It is further submitted that the deceased had not completed 50 years, however, the Tribunal had fixed multiplier ‘11’ instead of multiplier ‘13’. The further ground raised is that the Tribunal did not add future prospects while calculating compensation under the head ‘loss of income’.
6. This Court carefully went through Exs.P10 and P11. It is seen that even as per the income-tax returns, the gross income is shown as Rs.1,08,863/- for the income-tax returns filed for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. In such an event, the monthly income will only be Rs.9,000/- and hence, the Tribunal had rightly fixed the monthly income.
7. On going through the records, it is seen that the deceased at the time of demise was only 49 years 9 months and 8 days. Hence, the Tribunal ought to have applied multiplier ‘13’, instead, multiplier ‘11’ has been applied. The Tribunal had also not added future prospects. Considering the age of the deceased 25% has to be added towards future prospects. It is seen that there are totally four claimants and the Tribunal had deducted 1/3 towards personal expenses instead of 1/4.
8. In view of the above, the compensation under the head ‘loss of income/dependency’ is calculated as follows:
Monthly Income
| :
| Rs. 9,000/-
| Add: 25% future prospects
| :
| Rs. 2,250/-
| | | ----------------
| | | Rs. 11,250/-
| Less: Personal expenses (1/4)
| :
| Rs. 2,813/-
| | | -----------------
| | | Rs. 8,437/-
| | | x 12
| | | -----------------
| Annual income
| :
| Rs. 1,01,244/-
| Multiplier
| :
| x 13
| | | -----------------
| Loss of dependency
| :
| Rs.13,16,172/-
| | | -----------------
|
9. The Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of love and affection. This Court is inclined to consolidate the same and grant a sum of Rs.40,000/- under the head ‘loss of consortium’. The Tribunal has not granted any award towards ‘loss of estate’ and ‘transport charges’ and hence, a sum of Rs.5,000/- each is granted under such heads.
10. The compensation awarded under the other heads are just and reasonable and do not require the interference of this Court.
11. In the light of the above discussion, this Court modifies the compensation in the following manner:
Sl.No.
| Compensation awarded under the head
| Amount by the Tribunal (in Rs.)
| Amount awarded by this Court (in Rs.)
| 1.
| Loss of expectation
| 7,92,000/-
| 13,16,172/-
| 2.
| Funeral expenses
| 5,000/-
| 5,000/-
| 3.
| Medical and ambulance transport
| 2,83,000/-
| 2,83,000/-
| 4.
| Loss of consortium
| 10,000/-
| 40,000/-
| 5.
| Loss of love and affection
| 10,000/-
| -
| 6.
| Loss of estate
| -
| 5,000/-
| 7.
| Transport charges
| -
| 5,000/-
| | Total
| 11,00,000/-
| 16,54,172/-
|
12. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.11,00,000/- is enhanced to Rs.16,54,172/-. The second respondent insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation, less the amount already deposited, together with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw their respective share on due application. Insofar as the enhanced compensation of Rs.5,54,172/- is concerned, the appellants/claimants will not be entitled for interest for the default period as was ordered by this Court in C.M.P.No.14570 of 2025 in C.M.A.No.584 of 2013 dated 13.08.2025. Insofar as the enhanced compensation is concerned, the deficit court fee, if not paid, shall be paid by the claimants. The other directions issued by the Tribunal with regard to the mode of payment of compensation remains unaltered. The guidelines issued by the Division Bench of this Court in C.M.A.No.2064 of 2026, dated 08.07.2026 shall be strictly complied with respect to disbursement of compensation amount to the claimants.
In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
|
| |
