The court upheld the Tribunal's award of compensation for a fatal motorcycle accident, affirming findings of negligence and the calculation method used for compensation.

JUDGMENT :

R. Sakthivel, J.

Feeling aggrieved by the ‘Award dated July 21, 2023 passed in M.C.O.P.No.764 of 2021 by the 'Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Special District Court No.-II), Cuddalore' ['Tribunal' for short], the second respondent therein - Insurance Company has preferred C.M.A.No.521 of 2024 praying to set aside the Award, while the petitioners therein have preferred Cross Objection No.41 of 2024 praying to enhance the compensation. This Common Judgment will govern both, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Cross Objection.

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Motor Claims Original Petition.

3. By the impugned Award, the Tribunal has computed a compensation of Rs.59,42,375/-, out of which 10% has been deducted towards contributory negligence on the part of deceased and thus, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.53,48,200/- to the petitioners 1 to 5 along with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of deposit.

PETITIONERS' CASE:

4. The first petitioner is the wife of the deceased – Srinivasan. Second and third petitioners are his minor sons. Fourth and fifth petitioners are his parents. On the fateful day viz., May 1, 2021, at about 05.30 p.m., the deceased–Srinivasan was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-91-Y-5555, on Virudachalam to Cuddalore Main Road. While so, the First respondent's Honda Activa bearing Registration No.TN-31-CW-9015 travelling in the same direction, at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner, hit behind the deceased’s motorcycle, as a result of which, the deceased was thrown off the motorcycle. The deceased sustained grievous injuries on his head and multiple fractures all over his body. Immediately, he was taken to Government Hospital, Virudachalam and subsequently he was transferred to JIPMER, Pondicherry. Thereafter, he succumbed to the injuries on May 2, 2021.

4.1. At the time of accident, the deceased was aged about 45 years, and was earning a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per month being the proprietor of ‘Srinivasa Transport and Contractor’.

4.2. The first petitioner lodged a complaint before Mandharakuppam Police station against the driver of an unregistered motorcycle. After investigation, police officials filed Ex.P.8 - Final Report as against the rider of the Honda Activa Scooter bearing Reg.No.TN-31-CW-9015. According to the petitioners, the accident occurred only due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the Honda Activa Scooter; the first respondent's vehicle was insured with the second respondent – Insurance Company; and hence, both the respondents are liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners filed the Claim Petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) along with interest and costs.

RESPONDENTS' CASE

5. The first respondent remained absent and therefore, was set ex-parte before the Tribunal.

6. The second respondent filed counter denying the Claim Petition averments and also contending that the first respondent had no valid driving licence at the time of accident. According to them, the deceased was riding the motorcycle and suddenly crossed the road and hence, he also contributed to the accident. Hence, the owner and the Insurance company of the deceased travelled motorcycle are also necessary parties to the proceedings. Therefore, this petition is liable to be dismissed.

TRIBUNAL

7. The Tribunal framed the following points for consideration:-

i) Whether the accident took place due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN-31-CW-9015?

ii) Whether the respondents are liable to pay compensation?

iii) Whether the petitioners are entitled for the compensation ? If so, from whom and what is the quantum?

iv) To what other reliefs, the petitioners are entitled to?

8. Before the Tribunal, on the side of the petitioners, the first petitioner / wife of