IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON PRONOUNCED ON

10.12.2025 22.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU CMA No. 304 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.2091 of 2022 Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., No.609-A2, 2^nd Floor, Aandavar Plaza, Salem Main Road, Namakkal – 637 001.

Appellant(s)

Vs

1.Sangeetha, aged 25 years W/o.Arumugam

2.Minor Sudarshan, aged 8 years S/o.Arumugam

3.Minor Sanjay, aged 6 years S/o.Arumugam (Minor respondents are represented by next friend/

mother Sangeetha)

4.Lakshmi W/o.Viveganathan, No.1/214, Maariyamman Koil Strett Valayapatti Post, Namakkal District – 637 020.

Respondent(s)

Prayer:

Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to set aside the decree and judgment passed in M.C.O.P.No.437 of 2019 on 26.10.2021 on the file of the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal / Additional District Court at Namakkal and be pleased to dismiss the above claim and allow the CMA.

For Appellant(s): Mr.Dhakshanamoorthy For RR1 to 3 : Mr.C.Thangaraju Deceased For R4 :

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by K.KUMARESH BABU. J.)

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant–

Insurance Company challenging the award dated 26.10.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby a total compensation of Rs.37,44,403/- was awarded in favour of the dependants of the deceased. 2) The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the deceased was employed as a Dyeing Master at Sivasakthi Dyeing Mill and was stated to be earning a monthly income of Rs.35,000/-. On 24.02.2019, while the deceased was riding a two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 28 AM 4069, he was hit by another two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 88 D 7508. The deceased sustained grievous injuries in the accident and, despite treatment, succumbed to the injuries on 04.03.2019, after eight days.

3) An FIR came to be registered in Crime No.80 of 2019 on the file of Mohanur Police Station. The wife and minor children of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.37,44,403/- under various heads, including loss of income, medical expenses, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, and funeral expenses. Aggrieved by the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal.

4) Heard Mr. Dhakshnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant–Insurance Company, and Mr. C. Thangaraju, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3.

5) The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal erred in relying upon the salary certificate marked as Ex.P18, which was issued on the letterhead of the company and was not supported by statutory documents such as Form 16. It was further submitted that the employer of the deceased was not examined to substantiate the alleged income and that the fixation of monthly income at Rs.25,000/- was excessive. It was also contended that the Tribunal erred in granting 30% towards future prospects, whereas only 25%

ought to have been granted. The learned counsel further argued that the deceased had not produced a valid driving licence and was not wearing a helmet at the time of the accident, thereby contributing to the head injury sustained by him. According to the appellant, the Tribunal failed to consider contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and passed an excessive award, which is liable to be set aside.

6) Per contra, the learned counsel for the claimants submitted that the Tribunal had properly appreciated the evidence available on record and arrived at a just and reasonable compensation. It was contended that no interference is warranted by this Court and that the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

7) This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and