IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 09.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI

1.Parvathi

2.Tamilarasi

3.Yuvadhurai

4.Minor.Harish Rep. by his next friend, mother Parvathi/first appellant.

...Appellants vs.

1.Muthuvel

2.National Insurance Company Limited, Sankagiri Durg Division, Door No.19/B, SR Complex, Rajamani Thottam, Bhavani Main Road, NH, Sankagiri Taluk, Salem District, Having Branch Office at, Salem Division, Second Floor, L.R.N. Building, Saradha College Road, Salem District. ...Respondents PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to allow the Appeal and to enhance the Award dated 11.07.2022 in M.C.O.P.No.1517 of 2021 on the file of Special District Court (MCOP cases), Salem.

For Appellants : Mr.R.Navaneetha Krishnan For R-2 : Mr.D.Baskaran JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the Award dated 11.07.2022 passed in M.C.O.P.No.1517 of 2021 on the file of Special District Court (MCOP cases), Salem for enhancement of compensation.

2. The parties are indicated herein as per their litigative status and ranking before the Tribunal.

3. Claim Petition was filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the death of deceased Muthusamy, in a road traffic accident that took place on 04.10.2021. 4. The Tribunal, upon consideration of the evidence and after hearing arguments advanced by either side, passed an award for a sum of Rs.13,15,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. The amounts granted under various heads are given hereunder:

5. The learned counsel for the appellants would vehemently contend that the deceased, who was working as driver-cum-owner of TATA ACE at the age of 47 years was earning a sum of Rs.35,000/- per month. He would further submit that the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- including the future prospects is totally inadequate and also would submit that the amount granted for loss of love and affection is less and sought for enhancement of compensation.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/Insurance Company would strenuously argue that based upon the age, occupation and other attending circumstances, the amounts granted by the Tribunal under various heads are reasonable and acceptable and hence, it does not call for any interference by this Court.

7. It has come on record through the evidence of P.W.1/wife of the deceased that the deceased was earning not less than Rs.35,000/- per month as a owner-cum-driver of the TATA ACE vehicle, at the time of accident. To substantiate the monthly income of the deceased no document was marked before the Tribunal. Date of accident is 04.10.2021. As per the Aadhaar card, the age of the deceased has been taken as 48 years, at the relevant point of time. As the claimants are four in number, as held in Sarala Verma's case, further sum of Rs.40,000/- is granted for loss of consortium. As held in National Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Pranay Sethi and others reported in 2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court standard addition to be added with income (future prospects) while computing loss of dependency. For the age group of persons between 40-50 years, 25% is to be added as future prospects. As held in Sarala Verma -vs- Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in 2009(2) TNMAC 1 (SC), for personal and living expenses, ¼ is to be deducted and the relevant multiplier to be adopted is 13. For computing loss of dependency, the following formula emerges:

Rs.17,000/- + 25%- ¼ x12 x13 m = Rs.24,86,328/-

8. Towards loss of estate, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is granted. In consideration of the