BRANCH MANAGER Vs. C.AZHAGU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited challenging the impugned award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Judicial Magistrate), Sivagangai in M.C.O.P. No. 27 of 2010 dated 30.9.2011, complaining the quantum of Compensation and also the Application of multiplier for calculating the Compensation. The facts leading to the filing of the Claim Petition are that when the deceased by name Tmt. A. Ramu, being the Wife of the First Claimant-Mr. C. Azhagu and the mother of the Claimants 2 to 4 in the Claim Petition, was carrying water at about 6.00 a.m., on 28.3.2009, the offending Bus bearing Registration No. TN-59-AZ-2207 coming from the opposite direction and driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the said Tmt. A. Ramu, resultantly, the said Tmt. Ramu, who sustained injuries on her head and other multiple abrasions all over the body, succumbed to the injuries in the Government Headquarters Hospital, Ponamaravathi on the same day. Under this background, since the deceased being the Wife of the First Claimant and mother of the Claimants 2 to 4, a Claim Petition was filed even though for a claim of Rs. 3,63,500/-, the Claimants restricted the claim to Rs. 3,00,000/-. A detailed Counter Affidavit was filed by the Insurance Company, the Appellant herein, taking a stand that the claim of compensation for the death of the deceased Tmt. A. Ramu, Wife of the First Claimant and mother of the Claimants 2 to 4, in a road accident was not maintainable in law and on facts, hence, they were not entitled to get any relief. Further, it was also pleaded that the Claimants were put to strict proof that the deceased died due to injuries she had sustained in the alleged accident said to have occurred at 6.00 a.m., on 28.3.2009. The Insurance Company also objected that the claim of Rs. 2,000/- towards Nutrition was not acceptable; that the claim of Rs. 50,000/- towards Loss of Love and Affection, Mental Agony and Loss of Estate were excessive and that the claim of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards Loss of Dependency was highly excessive. Finally, it was pleaded that 50% have to be deducted towards the Personal and Living Expenses of the deceased, as all the Claimants were not dependants. Pending disposal of the Claim Petition, the First Claimant also died. Ultimately, upon hearing the respective submissions, the Tribunal allowed the Claim Petition and granted a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation in favour of the Claimants along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Petition till the date of realisation. Hence, the present Appeal by the Insurance Company.

(2.) Challenging the aforesaid order, learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the Tribunal miserably failed to fix the monthly income of the deceased, similarly, failed to adopt the correct multiplier for calculating the amount of compensation. It was further pleaded that even the method of calculating the compensation in a case of fatal accident was not followed by the Tribunal. On this basis, he prayed for setting aside the order of the Tribunal.

(3.) Heard the respective learned Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 as well.