Madras High Court
The Manager vs Mrs. S. Lakshmi on 25 February, 2025
Author: R.Suresh Kumar
Bench: R.Suresh Kumar
C.M.A.No.1870 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
C.M.A.No.1870 of 2022
and
C.M.P. No. 13578 of 2022
The Manager,
Reliance General Ins.Co.Ltd.,
No.6, Haddows Road, Reliance House,
6th floor, Nungambakkam,
Chennai 6. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Mrs. S. Lakshmi
2.Minor S. Baby Shalini
3.Minor S. Shobana
4.Minor S.Sowmaiya
(Minors rep., by NG and mother S.Lakshmi)
all residing at No.202, Mariyamman Koil Street,
Bujjireddy Palli Colony, Tiruttani Taluk,
Tiruvallur District.)
5.Mr. B. Mohan ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1870 of 2022
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, against the Judgment and decree dated 25.08.2021 made in
M.C.O.P.No.201 of 2015 on th file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub
ordinate Judge Court, Tiruttani.
For Appellant : Ms. C. Bhuvanasundari.
For Respondents : Mr. K.R. Ponnusamy for
M/s.Anand & Surya for R1 to R4.
R5 – Exparte.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by Dr. A.D. Maria clete, J)
The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (CMA) has been preferred under
Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the appellant, Reliance General
Insurance Co. Ltd., challenging the award dated 25.08.2021 in M.C.O.P. No. 201
of 2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Tiruttani.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The Facts of the Case in Brief: The claimants, being the wife and minor
children of the deceased Settu, filed M.C.O.P. No. 201 of 2015 before the Tribunal
seeking compensation for the death of Settu in a motor vehicle accident on
16.06.2015. The deceased, along with one Supphuru, was riding a motorcycle
when a tempo traveller bearing registration No. TN 20 BY 1206, driven rashly and
negligently, collided with the motorcycle. Settu succumbed to injuries sustained in
the accident.
3. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, awarded a sum of
Rs. 19,77,100/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till
realization.
4. The appellant insurance company has filed this appeal challenging the
award mainly on the following grounds: The Tribunal failed to consider the
contributory negligence of the deceased, as he was allegedly under the influence
of alcohol at the time of the accident. The Tribunal erred in determining the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
deceased's notional income at Rs. 10,000/- per month. The award of the parental
consortium is excessive. The interest awarded is disproportionate.
5. The appellant contends that the deceased was under the influence of
alcohol at the time of the accident and, therefore, contributed to the occurrence.
However, the Tribunal has rightly found that there was no proper evidence to
establish contributory negligence. The post-mortem certificate merely states that
the deceased's mouth was closed, and there was no pulse, which is not conclusive
proof of intoxication. Further, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent
driving of the tempo driver, who was charge-sheeted by the police. The Tribunal's
finding that the appellant failed to prove contributory negligence is therefore
upheld.
6. The Tribunal adopted a notional income of Rs. 10,000/- per month,
considering the deceased's occupation as a weaver. The appellant contends that no
documentary evidence was produced to prove this income. However, in the
absence of direct proof, the Tribunal was justified in adopting a reasonable
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
notional income based on prevailing wages. Further, the Tribunal has rightly
applied the multiplier method as per the Judgment in Sarla Verma v. DTC [(2009)
6 SCC 121]. The future prospects were also appropriately considered as per
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. Hence, this
Court finds no infirmity in the calculation of loss of dependency.
7. The appellant argues that parental consortium should not have been
awarded to each minor child. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma
General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram [(2018) 18 SCC 130] has recognized
parental consortium for minor children. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 40,000/- to each
child, which is in line with established legal principles and cannot be termed
excessive.
8. The appellant seeks reduction in the interest rate of 7.5% per annum. This
Court finds that the Tribunal has awarded the standard rate of interest in
consonance with various judicial pronouncements, including Dhanraj v. New
India Assurance Co. Ltd. [(2004) 8 SCC 553]. Therefore, no interference is
warranted.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9. In these circumstances, this Court finds that the award passed by the
Tribunal is just and reasonable and there is no ground to interfere with the Award
passed by the Tribunal.
10. Hence, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed, confirming the
compenstion awarded by the Tribunal at Rs. 19,77,100/- with interest at 7.5% per
annum. The appellant is directed to deposit the entire award amount, if already not
deposited with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the first
respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw her respective share of the award
amount along with proportionate interest and costs as per the apportionment fixed
by the Tribunal, less the amount if any, already withdrawn. The shares of the
second to fourth respondents/minors are directed to be deposited in any of the
Nationalized Bank in the interest bearing Fixed Deposit as per the apportionment
fixed by the Tribunal till they attain majority and the first respondent/claimant,
mother of the minor respondents 2 to 4 is permitted to withdraw the accrued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
interest once in three months for the welfare of the minors. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.K., J) (A.D.M.C., J)
25.02.2025
ay
To
1.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Subordinate Judge Court,
Tiruttani.
2.The Section Officer,
VR Section,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R. SURESH KUMAR, J
and
DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J
ay
and
25.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
