M. Govindammal v. P. Neelamegam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI C.M.A.No.3163 of 2024 1.M.Govindammal 2.Minor M.Lashiga ... Appellants Vs.
1.P.Neelamegam 2.The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Motor Third Party Claims Office, No.232, Bombay Mutual Building, 6th Floor, NSC Bose Road, Chennai-1.
... Respondents PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, prays to enhance the compensation in judgment and decree dated 03.04.2024 in M.C.O.P.No.2231 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Nalliyappan For R2 : Mrs.S.R.Sumathy
JUDGMENT
The appellants have filed this appeal against the award passed in M.C.O.P. No. 2231 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, dated 03.04.2024.
2. The brief facts of the case of the appellants/claimants are as follows: The 1st appellant is the wife and the 2nd appellant is the daughter of the deceased, Mr. K. Manikandan. On 18.04.2021, at about 16:00 hours, while the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing Registration No. TN-19-X-9924, proceeding on Trichy Road near Paranur, from the Chennai Railway Over Bridge in the Guindy to Savarambakkam direction, the rider of the motorcycle drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, without following traffic rules and regulations, and dashed against the centre median. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries, was admitted to SRMC Hospital, and succumbed to his injuries on 19.04.2021 while undergoing treatment. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 45 years. He was working as a flower vendor (marriage decorator) and was earning Rs. 30,000/- per month. The 1st respondent is the owner, and the 2nd
respondent is the insurer, of the said motorcycle. Both respondents are jointly, severally, vicariously, and statutorily liable to pay compensation to the appellants / petitioners, along with interest.
3. Upon considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs. 22,20,000/- as compensation, directing the 2nd respondent to pay the said amount to the appellants, along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realization (excluding the period of dismissal for default, if any).
4. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants (claimants) have filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the deceased was a flower vendor (Marriage Decorator) earning Rs.30,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal erroneously considered only salary of Rs. 15,000/-. He therefore, prayed for enhancement of compensation.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent contended that the award passed by the Tribunal is based on well-settled principles of law applicable at the time of the order, and therefore, it need not be interfered.
7. The deceased was working as a flower vendor (Marriage Decorator). However, no documentary evidence was adduced by the claimants to substantiate their claim that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month as mentioned in their claim petition. In the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that fixing the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.18,000/- would meet the ends of justice.
8. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. vs Pranay sethi and others, reported in 2017 (2) TNMAC 601, 25% is to be added towards future prospects of the deceased. The deceased died, leaving behind the appellants, who are his legal heirs, namely, his wife and one minor children. Hence, 1/3 of the income is to be deducted towards the deceased's personal expenses. The deceased was
aged 45 years at the time of the accident, and as per the decision rendered in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, the proper multiplier to be adopted in the instance case is 14.
9. Calculation Notional Income = Rs.18,000/- 40% Future Prospects = 18,000 + 4,500 = 22,500/- After 1/3 deduction = 22,500 - 7,500= Rs.15,000/- Loss of dependency = Rs.15,000 x 12 x 14 = Rs.25,20,000/-
10. In addition, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of (i)Loss of Estate is enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.16,500/-, (ii) Funeral expenses is enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.16,500/- and transportation charges are enhanced from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/-.
11. The following tabular column sets out the amounts awarded by the Tribunal and the enhanced amounts awarded by this Court under
various heads:
Sl. No Heads Amount (in Rs.) awarded by the Tribunal Amount (in Rs.) awarded by the High Court 1.
Loss of dependency 21,00,000 25,20,000 2.
Loss of Estate 15,000 16,500 3.
Funeral expenses 15,000 16,500 4.
Loss of Consortium 80,000 80,000 5.
Transportation Expenses 10,000 15,000 Total Rs.22,20,000 Rs.26,48,000 Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.22,20,000/- to Rs.26,48,000/-, which shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
12. In the result:
i. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
ii. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced from Rs.22,20,000/- to Rs.26,48,000/-.
iii. The appellants/claimants are directed to pay the Court fee for the
enhanced compensation amount, if any. The Registry is directed to draft the decree only after the receipt of the Court fee. iv. The 2nd respondent, New India Assurance Company Ltd., Chennai-1, is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount, i.e., Rs.26,48,000 /- (after deducting the amount already deposited), together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of deposit, to the credit of M.C.O.P. No. 2231 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt or uploading of a copy of this order. v. On such deposit being made by the 2nd respondent, the appellants/claimants are at liberty to withdraw the same, as per the apportionment made by the tribunal, after following due process of law. vi. The appellants/claimants shall not be entitled to claim interest for the period of delay, if any, in filing this appeal.
23.07.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/non Speaking order Neutral Case citation: yes/no rri To 1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai.
2.The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Motor Third Party Claims Office, No.232, Bombay Mutual Building, 6th Floor, NSC Bose Road, Chennai-1.
3.The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of Madras.
T.V.THAMILSELVI , J.
rri
C.M.A.No. 3163 of 2024 23.07.2025