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

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 2325

2025 MHC 19
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.

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

The court upheld the Tribunal's award of compensation, affirming findings of negligence and contributory negligence, while confirming the income assessment and application of the multiplier method for compensation calculation.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections related to compensation for motor accident claims - The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.53,48,200/- after deducting 10% for contributory negligence; the deceased was found to have contributed to the accident by not wearing a helmet. (Paras 3, 9, 10, 15, 19)

(B) Negligence - The court upheld the Tribunal's finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the Honda Activa, emphasizing that the second respondent failed to provide evidence to support claims of the deceased's contributory negligence. (Paras 14, 15)

(C) Quantum of Compensation - The court confirmed the Tribunal's calculations regarding the deceased's income and the application of the multiplier method for determining compensation, stating that the award was justified. (Paras 16, 17)

Facts of the case:
The deceased, Srinivasan, was involved in an accident while riding a motorcycle and was struck by a Honda Activa, resulting in fatal injuries. The petitioners sought compensation of Rs.2,00,00,000/- based on the deceased's claimed income of Rs.2,00,000/- per month.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal determined that the accident was primarily due to the negligent riding of the Honda Activa and awarded compensation after considering contributory negligence.

Issues: The main issues were the liability of the respondents for the accident and the appropriate compensation amount.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the Tribunal's assessment of negligence and compensation was appropriate, with no substantial evidence presented to contradict the findings.

Result: Both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and the Cross Objection are dismissed, and the Tribunal's award is confirmed.

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

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top