Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 2763
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
Navaneetha and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Ashok and Anr. – Respondents
CMA Nos.696, 697 and 698 of 2025
Decided On : 03-04-2025
For the Appellants : Mr. R. Navaneetha Krishnan
For the Respondents: Mr. J. Chandran.
Court emphasized the need for proper assessment of compensation based on notional income and future prospects of deceased victims in fatal accident cases.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Regulation of compensation - Common award challenged in MCOPs following a fatal accident involving a lorry. Claimants were dependents of deceased victims. (Paras 1-5)
(B) Compensation - The Court found accidents were due to negligent driving. Award modified to enhance compensation from previous tribunal amount to Rs.35,35,400/- with interest. (Paras 10, 20, 26)
(C) Issues - The central issues addressed were the determination of the accident's cause and appropriate compensation. (Paras 8, 15, 20)
(D) Findings of Court - The Court reiterated notional income for deceased, calculated at Rs.16,500, including dependence factors and non-pecuniary damages. (Paras 18-20, 24-30) (E) Ratio Decidendi - The court's reasoning stressed prioritization of firm evidence for income alongside standard adjustments for future prospects and personal expenses. (Paras 16, 18) (F)
Result: Appeals allowed with modifications to compensation awarded.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court analyzed claims stemming from a common accident, determining liability. (Para 6 , 10 , 19 , 27) |
| 2. disputed income calculation methods for deceased, impacting compensation. (Para 14 , 15 , 20 , 31) |
| 3. final rulings based on comprehensive assessments and claim adjustments. (Para 32 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
(S. SOUNTHAR, J.)
These civil miscellaneous appeals are filed challenging the common award passed in MCOP.Nos. 807, 806, and 808 of 2021 respectively on the file of Special District Judge, MCOP Tribunal, Salem.
2. Since all these appeals are arising out of the same accident, they are taken up together for hearing.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
4. It is the case of the claimants that they are all dependents of the deceased persons namely Saminadhan, Eswaran and Selvaraj, who died in a road accident involving a lorry belonged to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent on 17.06.2021.
5. It is the case of the claimants in MCOP.No.807 of 2021 that the deceased Saminadhan, husband of the 1st claimant, father of the 2nd claimant and son of the 3rd and 4th claimants was riding his two-wheeler bearing registration number TN-52-F-9951 on Dharmapuri to Salem main road by following all the traffic rules. The deceased in MCOP.No.808 of 2021, Selvaraj travelled in the same bike as pillion rider. The lorry belonged to the 1st respondent insured with the 2nd respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two-wheeler ridden by the deceased and two other two-wheelers. As a result of the accident, both driver and pillion rider were died and the claim petition in MCOP.No.807 of 2021 was laid by dependents of driver Saminadhan seeking compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. The claim petition in MCOP.No.808 of 2021 was laid by dependents of deceased pillion rider Selvaraj claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-
6. It is the case of the claimants in MCOP.No.806 of 2021 that husband of the first claimant, father of the second claimant and son of the claimants 3 and 4, namely Eswaran had driven his two-wheeler bearing registration number TN-27-W-8076 on the extreme left-hand side of the road in Dharmapuri to Salem Main Road. The husband of the first claimant in MCOP.No.808 of 2021, father of the claimants 2 and 3 and son of the claimants 4 and 5 namely Selvaraj travelled in the very same bike driven by Saminadhan as a pillion rider. When they came near Thoppur Kanavayi Irattai palam, the lorry belonged to the first respondent insured with the second respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the two-wheeler driven by Eswaran and two other two-wheelers. As a result of the accident, both the driver and the pillion rider of the two-wheeler bearing registration number TN-52-F-9951 and the rider of the two wheeler bearing registration No.TN-27-W-8076 died. Hence, three separate claim petitions were filed by the dependents of the deceased Saminadhan, Eswaran and Selvaraj in MCOP.No.807 of 2021, MCOP.No.806 of 2021 and MCOP.No.808 of 2021.
7. Since all these original petitions are arising out of the same accident, they were taken up together for enquiry.
8. The respondents filed their counter and opposed the claim petitions on the ground that the riders of the two wheelers engaged in racing in the National Highway under the influence of alcohol and attempted to overtake the lorry of the first respondent and in the process they fell down and succumbed to injuries. Therefore, according to the respondents, the entire negligence was on the part of the deceased and there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry.
9. Before the Tribunal, the wife of the deceased in MCOP.No.806 of 2021 was examined as PW-1. The wife of the deceased in MCOP.No.807 of 2021 was examined as PW-2. The wife of the deceased in MCOP.No.808 of 2021 was examined as PW-3. Two eye witnesses were examined as PW4 and PW5. On behalf of the responde
