SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3662

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS 
J. NISHA BANU, R. SAKTHIVEL, JJ.
The Managing Director, M/s.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Santhi & Ors. - Respondents
CMA No.521 of 2024 And CMP No.5171 And Cros.Obj.No.41 of 2024
Decided On : 02-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. J. Michael Visuvasam.
For the Respondents: Mr. F. Terry Chella Raja.

The court affirmed the Tribunal's decision on contributory negligence and confirmed the compensation awarded for the loss of life, applying proper legal standards regarding income assessment and future prospects.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Claim for compensation - Award of Rs.53,48,200/- was granted by the Tribunal post deduction for contributory negligence - Deceased sustained grievous injuries due to negligent driving - 10% contributory negligence was assigned for non-wearing of helmet. (Paras 2, 7, 9, 14, 17)

(B) Contributory Negligence - Standards of proof for establishing negligence - Lack of significant evidence from Insurance Company led to upholding of Tribunal's findings on negligence. (Paras 15, 16)

(C) Quantum of Compensation - Assessment of income and applicability of multiplier and considerations for future prospects handled correctly by Tribunal per established legal precedents. (Paras 17, 18)

Facts of the case:
Deceased was aged 45 and earning Rs.2,00,000/- per month as a business owner; the accident occurred on May 1, 2021, due to rash driving of the first respondent's vehicle leading to fatal injuries.

Findings of Court:
Tribunal established 90% liability on Insurance Company, post deduction for contributory negligence determining compensation fairly.

Issues: Main points included determination of negligence, liability of parties, and calculation of compensation due to contributory negligence.

Ratio Decidendi: Court confirmed Tribunal's ruling on contributory negligence and properly assessed compensation taking into account future prospects.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. tribunal awarded compensation of rs.53,48,200. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. details of the accident leading to the deceased's claim. (Para 4)
3. defendant's counter-argument denying liability. (Para 5 , 6)
4. tribunal's points of consideration regarding negligence. (Para 7 , 8)
5. tribunal's decision on liability and compensation. (Para 9 , 10)
6. arguments from both parties regarding compensation amounts. (Para 11 , 12)
7. court's detailed analysis on negligence and compensation quantum. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
8. final dismissal of appeals confirming the tribunal's decision. (Para 18 , 19)

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top