Lakshmi v. Vinayagam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21-08-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

1. LAKSHMI W/o. Panchamoorthy, No.103, Kaman Koil Street, Olaiyur, Andimadam Taluk, Ariyalur District.

2. Barathi D/o. Panchamoorthy, No.103, Kaman Koil Street, Olaiyur, Andimadam Taluk, Ariyalur District.

3. Minor. Banumathi D/o. Panchamoorthy, No.103, Kaman Koil Street, Olaiyur, Andimadam Taluk, Ariyalur District. (Minor rep. by Mother next friend 1st petitioner Lakshmi) Appellant(s) Vs

1. VINAYAGAM S/o. Jayabalan, No.122, Palla Theru Pandhal Via, Soraiyur, Vellur.

2.Ravi S/o. Muni Rathanam, No.12A, Perumal Koil Street, Kalambur Post, Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Motor TP HUB, Mochi Complex, No.179, Jawaharlal Mochi Complex, No.179, Jawahar Nehru Salai, Pondicherry.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To allow this appeal by enhancing the award passed by the Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Jayankondam) in MCOP.No.13/2022, dated 24.03.2025. For Appellant(s):

Mr. S. Udhayakumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.K.Vinod For R3 Mr.S.Dhakshnamoorthy For R2

ORDER

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed to allow this appeal by enhancing the award passed by the Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Jayankondam) in MCOP.No.13/2022, dated 24.03.2025.

2. On 25.12.2021, at about 07.00 pm. the deceased was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No. TN 49 P 4115 from Thennur to Olaiyur when he riding near to Senthil weigh bridge, bus bearing registration No. TN 25 AZ 9699 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against deceased Panchamurthy and sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, while on the way to the hospital he died.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submit that the deceased was working as mason but the tribunal has fixed only Rs. 8,500/- as notional income which is very meagre and also it awarded very less amount in other heads. Hence, he prays to enhance the compensation.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents submit that the claimants has not produced any income proof. Besides, on the date of the accident three persons were travelled in the motorcycle and the driver of the motorcycle did not possessed valid driving licence. Hence, the tribunal rightly fixed 30% towards contributory negligence which needs no interference.

5. Considering the cost of living at the time of the accident this Court is inclined to fix Rs.17,000/- towards notional income. Accordingly, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 22,10,000/- (17,000+4250x12x13-1/3) under the head of loss of dependency. Further, this Court is inclined to reduce the contributory negligence fixed by the tribunal from 30% to 20%. S.No.

Heads Compensation awarded by the tribunal.

Compensation awarded by this Court 1.

Loss of income/dependence Rs.12,48,000/- Rs. 22,10,000/- 2.

Loss of estate Rs.16,500/- Rs.16,500/- 3.

Loss of consortium Rs.1,32,000/- Rs.1,32,000/- 4.

Funeral expenses Rs.16500/- Rs.16,500/- 5.

Transportation charges Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.15,82,000/- Rs. 23,85,000/-

6. After deducting 20% toward contributory negligence, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 19,08,000/-. In view of the discussions made earlier, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 19,08,000/-. The respondent is directed to deposit the said amount - together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition to the date of realisation,

to the credit of MCOP.No.13/2022 on the file of the Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Jayankondam), within a period eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgement. Appellants are entitled to share the compensation equally. The share of the minor third appellant shall be deposited in the nationalized bank till she attaining majority and she is permitted to withdraw the interest. On such deposit, the appellant/claimants are permitted to withdraw the award amount by making formal application before the Tribunal. The respondent may deduct the amount, if any amount has already deposited before the tribunal.

7. With the above direction, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No costs.

21-08-2025 pbl Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

1. The Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Jayankondam).

2. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High court, Madras.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

pbl 21-08-2025