(Prayer: This civil miscellaneous appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Appeal to set aside the Decree and Judgment dated 30.08.2019 made in MCOP No.143/2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Mannarkudi and be pleased to dismiss the above claim as against the appellant.)
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the Transport Corporation against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Judge, Mannarkudi in MCOP No.143 of 2017 dated 30.08.2019.
2. The 1st and 2nd respondents are the parents and respondents 3 and 4 are the siblings of the deceased Dine4sh. The case of the claimants is that on 26.03.2017, the deceased Dinesh was riding his two wheeler on Karuvaikulam main road and at about 5.30 a.m, the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation was driven 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, sustained fatal injuries and he died on the spot. An FIR came to be registered in Crime No.42 of 2017 against the driver of the offending vehicle. 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 the conclusion that the accident had taken place only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation.
4. Having rendered such a finding, the Tribunal proceeded to fix the total compensation at Rs.17,41,000/- under the following heads :-
| Sl.No. | Compensation awarded under the head | Amount (in Rs.) |
| 1. | Loss of income | Rs.17,01,000/- |
| 2. | Loss of love and affection | Rs.15,000/- |
| 3. | Transport charges | Rs.10,000/- |
| 4. | Funeral expenses | Rs.15,000/- |
| Total | Rs.17,41,000/- |
6. Notice has been served on the respondents and name of the respondents have also been printed in the cause list. However, there is no appearance either in person or through counsel.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant and perused the materials available on record.
8. This Court also carefully went through the award passed by the Tribunal.
9. The main ground that was raised on the side of the appellant is that three persons were travelling on the two wheeler and as a result, there was rash and negligent driving on the part of the rider of the two wheeler and therefore, contributory negligence ought to have been fixed against the deceased. It is further contended that there was no proof of income and that the Tribunal fixed the notional monthly income at Rs.7,500/- and deducted 1/4th instead of ½ towards personal expenses and the deceased in this case was a bachelor, while fixing the compensation under the head of loss of income / dependency.
10. In the case in hand, the deceased was aged about 24 years and he left behind his parents and two minor siblings. The accident had taken place in the year 2017.
11. Insofar as the negligence is concerned, the Tribunal had taken into consideration the evidence of PW2, who is the eye-witness and also the driver, who is the driver of the bus belonging to the transport corporation. The Tribunal came to a conclusion that there was no contra evidence available on the side of the transport corporation to establish that the accident had taken place only because three persons were travelling on the two wheeler. In view of the same, the Tribunal rendered a finding that the entire negligence was attributable only as against the driver of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. The said finding does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court.
12. Insofar as the compensation fixed by the Tribunal is concerned, this Court exercises its power and jurisdiction under Order XLI Rule 33 of CPC and is inclined to modify the compensation.
13. Insofar as the compensation fixed under the head of loss of income is concerned, considering the fact that the accident had taken place in the year 2017, this Court is inclined to fix the notional monthly income at Rs.10,000/- to which 40% must be added towards future prospects and 1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Accordingly, the loss of income is calculated as follows :-
| Monthly Income | : | Rs. 10,000/- | |
| (+) 40% future prospects | : | Rs. 4,000/- | |
| -------------------------- | |||
| Rs. 14,000/- | |||
| Less: Personal expenses (1/3) | : | Rs. 4666.66/- | |
| ------------------ | |||
| Rs. 9,333,33 /- | |||
| x 12 | |||
| ------------------ | |||
| Annual income | : | Rs. 1,12,000/- | |
| Multiplier | : | x 18 | |
| ------------------ | |||
| Loss of income | : | Rs.20,16,000/- | |
| ------------------ | |||
15. The compensation granted under the other heads are just and reasonable and the same does not require the interference of this Court.
16. 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 income | Rs.17,01,000/- | Rs.20,16,000/- |
| 2. | Loss of love and affection | Rs.15,000/- | Rs.1,20,000/- |
| 3. | Transport charges | Rs.10,000/- | Rs.10,000/- |
| 4. | Funeral expenses | Rs.15,000/- | Rs.15,000/- |
| 5. | Loss of estate | Rs.15,000/- | |
| Total | Rs.17,41,000/- | Rs.21,76,000/- |
18. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.