Devi v. Solai Trans Carrier
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
1. Devi 2.P.Pugazanthi - Minor 3.P.Monashkumar - Minor (Minor Appellants 2 and 3 are rep. by their mother Devi as natural guardian)
4. Chinnammal Appellants Vs
1. Solai Trans Carrier No.76/141, II Floor, Coral Merchant Street, Chennai 01 2.United India Insurance Co Ltd Silingi Building, 4th Floor, No.134, Greams Road, Chennai 06 Respondents 1/7
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Sec.173 of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to set aside the award against the Judgment and decree dated 26.02.2024 and made in MACTOP No.2820 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Appellants:
Ms.N.Lavanya For Mrs.M.Malar For Respondents:
Mr. S. Dhakshnamoorthy For R2
JUDGMENT
Challenging the impugned award passed by the tribunal in MCOP.No.2820 of 2021, the appellants/petitioners have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation.
2. The appellants are wife, sons and mother of deceased Parthiban. The case of appellants is that on 17.04.2021 at about 19.45 hours, when the deceased was riding his two wheeler bearing Regn. No. TN-21 AU-5257 at Singaperumal Koil Oragadam Road, near VLS Crusher, Dasari Kunnathur Road Junction, Chengal District, the driver of a container lorry bearing Regn. No. TN-04-AU7086 drove it in a rash and negligent manner rammed against the deceased two wheeler and caused an accident. Due to which, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot. Under these circumstances, the claim petition came to be filed before the Tribunal seeking for payment of compensation of Rs.45,00,000/-.
2/7
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 only due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the 1 st respondent. Having come to such a conclusion, the Tribunal fixed the total compensation payable at Rs.30,35,000/- under various heads as follows:
S.No Compensation awarded under the head Amount (in Rs.) 1.
Loss of income 28,35,000 2.
Loss of estate 15,000 3.
Loss of consortium 1,60,000 4.
Funeral expenses 15,000 5.
Transport charges 10,000 Total compensation awarded (by adding Sl. Nos. 1 to 5) 30,35,000 4.The above compensation was directed to be paid with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
5. The learned counsel for appellants would argue that the accident was happened in the year 2021 and he was a driver in Greater Chennai Corporation, Nanganallur Zone and earning a sum of Rs.36,000/- per month, but without considering the same as well as without considering cost of living at that time, 3/7
the tribunal had fixed the notional income as Rs.18000/-. Hence, they prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6. The learned counsel for 2 nd respondent raised objections stating that the deceased was aged about 42 years and there is no proof produced on the side of appellants for the income derived by him and he is only a temporary driver in the Chennai Corporation. Hence, the Tribunal had rightly fixed the notional income as Rs.18,000/- as such is reasonable one, which needs no interference.
7. Heard rival submissions of both learned counsel for appellants and 2 nd respondent and perused the materials available on record.
8. On seeing the facts, it reveals that the accident was happened in the year 2021 and the deceased was employed only as temporary driver in Greater Chennai Corporation and earned a sum of Rs.36,000/- per month at the time of accident, but there is no documentary proof produced. However, considering the fact that he was the breadwinner of family and maintaining his family consisting of four members, who are appellants herein and also the fact that he was employed as a Driver in Greater Chennai Corporation, thereby he would have earned a sum of Rs.19,000/- per month and considering the cost of living at that time, this Court is inclined to enhance the notional income of the deceased Parthiban from Rs.18,000/- to Rs.19,000/-. The compensation that has been 4/7
fixed under the other heads are reasonable and does not require the interference of this Court.
9.In the light of the above discussion, the compensation awarded by the tribunal is modified as follows:
S.No Compensation awarded under the head Amount awarded by the tribunal (in Rs.) Amount (in Rs.) Award confirmed or granted or enhanced 1.
For loss of income Rs.19,000/- (add 25% future prospects) = 19000 + 4750 =23750 23750 x 12 x 14 (multiplier) = 39,90,000 - 1/4 (9,97,500) = 29,92,500 28,35,000 29,92,500 enhanced 2.
Loss of estate 15,000 15,000 confirmed 3.
Loss of consortium 1,60,000 1,60,000 confirmed 4.
Funeral expenses 15,000 15,000 confirmed 5.
Transport charges 10,000 10,000 confirmed Total 30,35,000 31,92,500 enhanced
10. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the tribunal at Rs.30,35,000/- is enhanced to Rs.31,92,500/-. 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 eight weeks from the date of 5/7
receipt of copy of this judgment. On such deposit of the enhanced compensation amount now determined by this Court, the appellants 1 and 4 are entitled to share the amount proportionately as ordered by the Tribunal and they are permitted to withdraw the enhanced award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. 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.
11. As far as the share of minor appellants viz., 2 nd and 3 rd appellants are concerned, the same shall be deposited in any nationalised bank bearing fixed deposit scheme until the minor attains majority and the interest thereon shall be withdrawn by minor appellants' mother, once in three months. 12.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.
12-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To
1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court. 6/7
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp 12-08-2025 7/7