Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mrs.J.NISHA BANU, Mr.R.SAKTHIVEL, JJ
IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
K. Vijayalakshmi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R. SAKTHIVEL, J.
Feeling aggrieved by the Award dated April 20, 2022 passed by the 'Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal / Special Subordinate Court, Cuddalore', ['Tribunal' for short] in M.C.O.P.No.1523 of 2016, the fourth respondent therein / Insurance Company has preferred C.M.A.No.470 of 2023 praying to set aside the Award, while the petitioners therein have preferred C.M.A.No.2123 of 2023 praying to enhance the compensation. This Common Judgment will dispose of both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals.
2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Motor Accidents Claim Original Petition.
PETITIONERS’ CASE
3. Petitioners are father and mother of the deceased - S.Ramanarayanan. On January 10, 2016 at about 02.30 a.m., the deceased – S.Ramanarayanan was travelling in the Car bearing Regn.No.TN-22-CH-9267, driven by another deceased – Ravi, on Chennai-Trichy National Highways near Chepauk Komugi Bridge. At that time, a lorry bearing Registration No.TN-34-D-3677, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the said car. Consequently, the deceased - S.Ramanarayanan passed away in the accident. Before the T
The court affirmed the Tribunal's finding of negligence on the lorry driver's part and adjusted the deceased's notional income, resulting in enhanced compensation of Rs.20,56,058.
The court affirmed that the burden of proof for negligence lies with the party alleging it, and modified the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to ensure it reflects the deceased's financial contri....
The court established that the FIR does not solely determine negligence, and the multiplier method is appropriate for calculating compensation based on functional disability.
The insurance company failed to prove negligence on the car driver's part; the lorry driver was found responsible for the accident. Compensation of Rs.6,04,830 was deemed just and reasonable.
The insurance company remains liable for compensation even when the deceased's negligence is alleged, unless proven otherwise through admissible evidence.
Contributory negligence must be proven and cannot be inferred; the deceased was not negligent, leading to a modified compensation of Rs.23,61,250.
The court enhanced the compensation for death in a motor accident, establishing the deceased's notional income and confirming the negligence of the Lorry driver.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of liability and quantum of compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
