IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM DATED: 06.02.2026 THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI Narasimman …Appellant Vs.

1. Gayathiri

2. M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Represented by its Manager, No.77, Oriental Complex, A.A. Street, Salem 636 001 … Respondents Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act,1988, praying to enhance the compensation amount awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri, in M.C.O.P. No.492 of 2022, dated 08.07.2024.

For Appellant : Mr. S.P. Yuvaraj For Respondents : Mr. D. Venkatachalam for R2 R1 - Notice dispensed with.

JUDGMENT

The present Appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri, in M.C.O.P. No.492 of 2022, dated 08.07.2024.

2. The appellant is the claimant in M.C.O.P. No.492 of 2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri, and he filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident that took place on 07.08.2022.

3. Shortly stated, on 07.08.2022, at about 18.30 hours, the appellant/claimant was riding TVS XL Motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN-24-AP-3270 at Chennai-Krishnagiri National Highways. At that time, while he was stopping the vehicle to cross the road at Orappam juction, an Innova car bearing Registration No. TN-54-K-9333 belonging to the 1^st respondent, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner without observing any traffic rules, came in high speed and dashed against the two wheeler of the appellant/claimant, due to which the appellant/claimant sustained injuries and was treated at Government Hospital, Krishnagiri and then at Nathan's Speciality Hospital, Krishnagiri.

3.1. According to the claimant, the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car was the cause of the accident and that since the said vehicle was insured with the 2nd respondent, the United India Insurance Company Limited, the owner and the insurer are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to him.

4. The claim petition was resisted by the 2^nd respondent/Insurance Company.

5. The Tribunal, after analysing the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the accident took place as alleged and the claimant was entitled for compensation and accordingly, a compensation of Rs.10,44,000/-

has been awarded carrying interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.

6. Aggrieved over the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

7. Mr. S.P. Yuvaraj, learned counsel for the appellant submits that, though the claimant was earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- by way of working as a mason, doing agricultural work and milk business, the Tribunal had awarded only a meagre amount of Rs.1,32,000/- per annum. He further submitted that the Tribunal has awarded meagre amounts under all the heads. Hence, prayed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

8. On the side of the respondent/Insurance Company it is submitted that, the learned Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case has awarded just compensation, which warrants any interference by this Court.

9. Heard on both sides. Records perused.

10. There is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident. As alleged by the claimant, but for rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle it would not have taken place. The findings recorded by the learned claims Tribunal is therefore, sustained.

11. On a perusal of the Award, it is seen that the Tribunal had fixed the annual income of the petitioner at Rs.1,32,000/- based on cost inflation index, since no proof of income was produced by the claimant. However, considering the year of accident, this Court deems it fit to fix the notional monthly income o