IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08.12.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

1.Sandhiya

2.Minor. Akil

3.Minor Anu Sri

4.Nagammal 5.Poonusamy ... Appellants Versus The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, (Salem Division), Salem Main Road, Bharathipuram Post, Dharmapuri Taluk & District.

... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the order made in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2016, dated 20.11.2021, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special District Court, Dharmapuri.

For Appellants : Mr.M.Selvam For Respondent : Mr.D.Nitin

JUDGMENT

This Appeal is directed as against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special District Court, Dharmapuri, in M.C.O.P.No.79 of 2020, dated 20.11.2021 .

2.Briefly stated, on 17.01.2020, one Sharath was riding his two wheeler bearing Reg. No.KA 53 EG 5326 along with deceased Senthil as the pillion in Kadathur to Dharmapuri main road. At that time, the bus bearing Reg.No.TN 29 N 2482 owned by TNSTC was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver dashing against the two wheeler and causing the accident. In the said accident, the rider and pillion rider of the two wheeler sustained multiple grievous injuries and died on the spot. At the time of the accident, the deceased Senthil was aged about 28 years and was earning Rs.40,000/- per month by working as borewell driver and driller. The claimants are the wife, minor children and parents of the deceased Senthil. A sum of Rs.50,00,000/- was claimed as compensation for the death of the deceased. The claim was resisted by the respondent/Corporation stating that the rider of the two wheeler was unable to control the vehicle and dashed on the front side of the bus and invited the accident. Since the accident was caused due to the negligence of the rider of the two wheeler, the respondent is not liable to pay any compensation to the claimants. Since there was no contra evidence on the side of the respondent/Corporation, the Tribunal has fixed the liability on the respondent/Corporation. Hence, the findings of the learned Tribunal in this regard is confirmed.

3.Though this appeal award has been challenged by the claimants on the ground that just compensation has not been awarded by the learned Tribunal, it is submitted that income of the deceased has not been correctly arrived at the Tribunal. The Tribunal has fixed the income of the deceased as Rs.9000/- per month, while the deceased was earning Rs.40,000/- per month.

4.On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Corporation would submit that, P.W.1, wife of the deceased during her cross examination has stated that her husband was working as salesman at the time of the accident. The Tribunal upon considering the above discrepancy rightly fixed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.9000/- which warrants any interference by this Court.

5.Heard on both sides, records perused.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the year of accident, the plight of the claimants, this Court deems it fit to fix the notional income of the deceased as Rs.14,000/- per month and add 40% to the future prospects making the total compensation towards loss of income (14000 + 5,600 ( 3/4 X 17 X 12 – 58,800 (deduction of 1/4^th personal expense) = Rs.29,98,800/-, and the compensation awarded under other heads are confirmed.

7.Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to enhance the compensation under the various heads, which are as follows:

8.As a result of the aforesaid discussion, (i) the present appeal is partly allowed and it is held that the appellants shall be entitled to a compensation of Rs.32,28,800/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the realization of the compensation.

(ii)The respondent/Corporation is directed to pay the above said compensation amount now determined by this Cour