NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. SUMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the award, dated 26.10.2015, passed in M.C.O.P.No.266 of 2011, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhavani, for a sum of Rs.45,62,500/-, towards compensation for the death of one M.Sudhakaran, aged about 51 years, a Scientist and Manager in Centronics Controls, who was allegedly earning about Rs.2,00,000/- per month, and had died in the accident that took place on 01.11.2010, when he was travelling in his car from Kumbakonam to Chennai, on the main road at Villupuram and hit by a bus coming in the opposite direction, belonging to the sixth respondent, driven by the fifth respondent, insured with the appellant-insurance company..

(2.) Mr.J.Chandran, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the insurance company has filed the appeal only questioning the quantum of compensation, as the monthly income of the deceased has been determined contrary to the evidence adduced, with a deduction of one-fourth towards personal expenses without any proof regarding four persons as dependants, and awarding compensation contrary to the Constitution Bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others, 2017 2 TNMAC 609 (SC), and also Rs.20,00,000/- towards loss of special skill of the deceased. The learned counsel would particularly point out that the average income for the past three years before the death of the deceased ought to have been taken into consideration by the Tribunal while determining the loss of income of the deceased, whereas, the Tribunal took into account the last year's i.e., 2009-2010 income, and, based on that, determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/-. He would further submit that Ex.P-8/Legal Heir Certificate would show only three persons as dependants, whereas, the claimants are four persons and the Tribunal, believing the same, erroneously deducted one-fourth towards personal expenses instead of one-third. On the basis of the above contentions, he would seek to reduce the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 claimants, would submit that the Tribunal has rightly determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/-, relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2015) 1 TN MAC 785 and, therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is perfectly in order and it cannot be faulted. As far as Ex.P-8/Legal Heir Certificate is concerned, the learned counsel would submit that though the legal heirs have been shown as three therein, since father is the second class heir, he is not shown in the document and, in any event, the eighty year old father shall be a dependant. Accordingly, he would seek confirmation of the award passed by the Tribunal.