C.M.A. No.1420 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.08.2023

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

C.M.A.No.1420 of 2023

and CMP No.18444 of 2023

1.Selvam

2.Govindaraj

3.Priyanka

...

Appellants

Vs.

1.J.Karthikeyan

2.M/s.The New India Assurance Co.

Having Divisional Office at T.P.Hub,

Sedhu Krishna Trade Centre,

No.133/31-A, Trichy Main Centre,

No.133/31-A, Trichy Main Road,

Gugai, Salem.

...

Respondents

Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the

Motor Vehicles Act to enhance the compensation in the award dated

01.11.2021 made in MCOP No.158 of 2020 on the file of the Special District

Court/MACT at Salem.

_____

1/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A. No.1420 of 2023

For Appellants

: Mr.S.Sathish

For Respondents

: Mr.R.Sreevidhya for R2

J U D G M E N T

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant

challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

2. The appellants filed claim petition in M.C.O.P. No.158 of 2020 on

the file of the Special District Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at

Salem claiming a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- as compensation for the death of one

Prakashraj who died in the accident that took place on 30.04.2019.

3. According to the appellants, on 30.04.2019 at about 16.30 hrs. while

the deceased Prakashraj was riding his Hero Splendor Plus motor cycle

bearing Regn.No.TN93 1170 on the left side of the Eadapadi –

Jalakandapuram Main Road, Vellanaickenpalayam, near Amman Koil; that a

lorry bearing Regn.No.TN52 A 3688 came from the opposite direction in a

rash and negligent manner, hit against the said Prakashraj and caused the

_____

2/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A. No.1420 of 2023

accident; that in the accident, the said Prakashraj sustained grievous injuries

on his vital organs, died on the spot and hence, the appellants filed claim

petition claiming compensation against the respondents.

4. The first respondent remained exparte before the Tribunal.

5. The second respondent filed counter statement denying the

averments made in the claim petition. It is stated that the deceased alone

drove the two wheeler in a rash & negligent manner and contributed to the

accident; that the deceased did not possess valid driving licence at the time of

accident; hence, the second respondent is not liable to pay compensation to

the appellant and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

6. Before the Tribunal, the first appellant examined himself as PW1

and marked eighteen documents as Exs.P1 to P18. On the side of the second

respondent, nine documents were marked as Exs.R1 to R9 but no witness

was examined.

7. The Tribunal, considering the oral and documentary evidence, held

_____

3/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.A. No.1420 of 2023

that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver

of the lorry belonging to the 1^st respondent and directed the second

respondent to pay a sum of Rs.13,81,000/- as compensation to the appellants,

at the first instance and recover the same from the 1^st respondent, for violation

of policy conditions.

8. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have preferred the instant

appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the

appellants produced Ex.P5-salary slip to prove his income. The appellant has

not examined the author of the said certificate and hence the Tribunal had not

accepted the said salary slip. The appellants filed C.M.P.No.18444 of 2023 to

receive the additional document mentioned which is the bank statement of the

deceased. The learned counsel further submitted that the Bank statement

would show that the deceased was earning an average of more than

Rs.20,000/- per month. Hence, even if the author of the salary slip has not

_____

4/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.i