Madras High Court
Thirugnanasambandam vs Jeyaraman on 19 June, 2025
Author: T.V.Thamilselvi
Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi
CMA No. 1090 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CMA No. 1090 of 2025
1.Thirugnanasambandam
2. Vishnusuryavardhana
3. Vigneshchandravardhana
Appellants
Vs
1. JEYARAMAN
2.The Divisional Manager
The United India Insurance Company
Ltd, 13-A, Nethaji Road,
Manjakuppam, Cuddalore
Respondents
PRAYER:- Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Sec.173 of Motor Vehicles
Act, praying to set aside the award against the judgement and decree dated
01.02.2023 made in MACTOP.No.446/2021 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims TTribunal, Cuddalore(Principal District Court) Cuddalore.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
CMA No. 1090 of 2025
For Appellants: Ms.N Lavanya
For Mrs.M.Malar
For Respondents: Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy For R2
R1 - Notice Dispensed With
JUDGEMENT
Challenging the impugned award passed by the tribunal in MCOP.No.446
of 2021, the petitioners have preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal seeking
for enhancement of compensation.
2. The petitioners are husband and sons of deceased Vasanthakumari. The
case of the petitioners is that on 18.02.2021 at about 09.00 hours while the
st
deceased was travelling in the 1 respondent bus bearing Regn. No. TN-82-Z-
9393 in Kannukulam main road near Vijay nagar, the driver of the vehicle
drove it in a random manner and at a very high speed in a rash and negligent
manner, due to which, the deceased fell down from the bus and stuck in the
wheel of bus and crushed under the tire and caused an accident. As a result of
which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries on the head and multiple
fractures all over the body and when she was taken to Government Hospital,
Sirkazhi, she died on the way to the hospital. Under these circumstances, the
claim petition came to be filed before the Tribunal seeking for payment of
compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
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 rider of the 1st respondent. Having come to such a conclusion, the
Tribunal fixed the total compensation payable at Rs.8,92,000/- under various
heads as follows:
S.No Compensation awarded under Amount
the head (in Rs.)
1. Loss of income (Rs.11000 x 12 x 7,92,000
1/3 x 9)
2. Love and affection 30,000
3. Funeral expenses 15,000
4. Loss of estate 15,000
5. Loss of Consortium 40,000
Total 8,92,000
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 deceased was
died due to the injury sustained in the accident, but the Tribunal failed to take
note of the said fact and failed to consider her age, occupation and income of
her. Inspite of that, the tribunal had erroneously fixed the award only taking into
consideration of the injury sustained by deceased Vasanthakumari. Hence, he
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
prayed to set aside the award passed by the tribunal and prayed for enhancement
of compensation.
6. The learned counsel for 2nd respondent raised objections stating that the
accident was happened solely due to the carelessness and negligence of
deceased, who was attempting to get down from the bus, lost control, fell down
and sustained fatal injuries. He would further argue that the accident was
happened in the year 2019, but without considering the cost of living at that
time, the tribunal had fixed the notional income as Rs.11000/-. Hence, they
prayed for enhancement of compensation.
7. The learned counsel for 2nd respondent raised objections stating that the
deceased was aged about 56 years old and since she was doing readymade
online business as self-employed, the Tribunal had rightly fixed the notional
income as Rs.11000/-, which needs no interference.
8. Heard rival submissions of both learned counsel for appellants and
respondent and perused the materials available on record.
9. On perusal of records, it reveals that at the time of accident, deceased
was aged about 56 years and she sustained grievous injury all over the body
including head injury as well as other grievous injury. Immediately, when she
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
was taken to the Government Hospital, on the way, she died. Therefore, due to
the injury sustained in the said accident, she died. But the Tribunal failed to take
into consideration of the same. Hence, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is liable to be set aside. Furthermore, on seeing the facts, it reveals
that the accident was happened in the year 2021, she would have earned a sum
of Rs.14,000/- and she was aged about 56 years. Therefore, on considering the
cost of living, this Court is inclined to enhance the notional income of the
deceased Vasanthakumar from Rs.11000/- to Rs.14000/- and also towards loss
of love and affection, this Court is inclined to enhance the sum awarded as
Rs.30,000/- is enhanced to Rs.90,000/-. The compensation that has been fixed
under the other heads are reasonable and does not require the interference of
this Court.
10.In the light of the above discussion, the compensation awarded by the
tribunal is modified as follows:
S.No Compensation awarded under Amount
the head (in Rs.)
1. Loss of income (Rs.14000 x 12 x 10,08,000
1/3 x 9)
2. Love and affection 90,000
3. Funeral expenses 15,000
4. Loss of estate 15,000
5. Loss of Consortium 40,000
Total 11,68,000
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
11. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the tribunal at
Rs.8,92,000/- is enhanced to Rs.11,68,00/-. 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. The 2nd 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 six weeks from the date of
receipt of this judgment.
12. On such deposit of the enhanced compensation amount now
determined by this Court, the appellants 1 to 3 are entitled to share the amount
proportionately as ordered by the Tribunal and the appellants 1 to 3 are
permitted to withdraw the enhanced award amount along with interest and costs,
less the amount if any, already withdrawn.
13.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
19-06-2025
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
rpp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
To
1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Judge, Cuddalore.
2. Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp
19-06-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:28:09 pm )
