Madras High Court
CMA/255/2024 of RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs M.RAMATHAL on 24 September 2026
CMA No. 255 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA
CMA No. 255 of 2024
CNR:{HCMA011254742023}
AND
CMP NO. 2787 OF 2024
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd
Having office at
Dhanums Towers, 1st Floor,
No.1, Binny Main Road,
Park Road St, Tiruppur 641 601.
..Appellant(s)
Vs
1. M.Ramathal
2. C.Sangitha
3. Minor C.Gowthaman
S/o. Sangitha,
4. Minor C.Amutha
D/o. Sangitha,
(3 and 4 Rep by her Natural Guardian
Mother C.Sangitha the 2nd Respondent)
5. M.Muthulakshmanan
6. M/s.Vignesh Associates
..Respondent(s)
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
Prayer: Appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
praying to set aside order the judgment and decree dated 25.04.2022
passed in M.C.O.P.No.1056 of 2020 on the file of the MACT District Court at Tiruppur.
For Appellant(s):
Mr. P.Suresh Srinivasan
For Respondent(s):
Mr.K.Myilsamy For R 2
R3 and R4 minors rep by R2
R1 - Not Ready in notice
Mr.A.Balaji For R6
R-5 - Served - No Appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.T.Asha J.) The Insurance Company seeks to challenge the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.1056 of 2020 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tiruppur) dated 25.04.2022.
2. The respondents 1 to 4 had filed M.C.O.P.No.1056 of 2020 claiming compensation for the death of one Chinnasamy, who is the son of the 1strespondent, husband of the 2ndrespondent and father of respondents 3 and 4 herein. It is their case that the said Chinnasamy, on 01.10.2020 at
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
about 09.30 a.m., was riding his TVS Star City bearing registration No.TN-37-BJ-7675 on the Palladam to Dharapuram Road. When he came near Palladam, the lorry belonging to the 2ndrespondent, which was being driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite side and dashed against the vehicle of the said Chinnasamy, which caused his death. It is their case that the said Chinnasamy was engaged in weaving work and was earning an income of not less than Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, they claimed a compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-.
3. The respondents 5 and 6 herein remained ex-parte before the lower court. The appellant-Insurance Company had filed a counter denying the nature of the accident and the involvement of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-59-CF-0073. It is their contention that the accident had happened on account of the deceased Chinnasamy. They would submit that the claim was bad for non-joinder, as the owner and insurer of the two- wheeler had not been impleaded as parties to the proceedings. They had denied the age, income and the relationship of the parties. They sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
4. Before the Tribunal, the 2nd respondent deposed as P.W1 and one Gopal, an eye witness as P.W2 and Exs.P1 to P10 were marked on their side. The appellant examined one Dinesh as R.W1 and marked Exs.R1 to R3. The Tribunal ultimately, on perusing the evidence, held that the accident had occurred only on account of the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the 1st respondent. The Tribunal below held that the respondents 1 to 4 had not proved the monthly income of the deceased and therefore, fixed the notional income at Rs.14,000/- and ultimately, granted a total compensation of a sum of Rs.28,92,400/-. Aggrieved by the award, the appellant-Insurance Company has filed the above appeal and the challenge is primarily on the ground of quantum.
5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. The grievance of the counsel for the 2nd respondent is that the quantum is high as the notional income has been wrongly arrived at. A reading of the order of the Tribunal would show that cogent reasons has been given for adopting a notional income of Rs.14,000/- and arrived at a
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
sum of Rs.28,22,400/- under the head of loss of income, out of the total compensation of Rs.28,92,400/-. However, a perusal of the compensation awarded would indicate that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the future prospects and has also not granted any amount under the head of loss of love and affection for respondents 1, 3 and 4 and has only granted an amount under the head of loss of consortium. However, the claimants have not filed an appeal challenging the award. Therefore, considering the fact that the notional income fixed at Rs.14,000/- per month is very much in tune with the income that the deceased would have earned in the year 2020, we see no reason to interfere with the said award. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (P.T.A.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 24-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SRN To The District Court(MACT) Tiruppur.
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
P.T.ASHA J. AND N.MALA J. SRN CMA No. 255 of 2024 AND CMP NO. 2787 OF 2024 24-09-2026
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )
CMA No. 255 of 2024
( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 01:25:20 pm )