CMA(MD)/1006/2026 of National Insurance Company Ltd Vs Stepe Graf on 2 November 2026

JUDGMENT

The second respondent/Insurance Company in M.C.O.P. No.649 of 2021, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, has filed the present C.M.A.(MD).No.1006 of 2026, challenging the award dated 21.03.2025 passed in M.C.O.P. No.649 of 2021.

2. Facts of the case:

2.1. The claimants in M.C.O.P. No.649 of 2021 are the dependants of the deceased Madhavan. According to the claim petition, on 02.07.2021 at about 9.00 hours, the deceased was riding his two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-45-AT-2601 on the Karur–Tiruchirappalli Main Road, keeping to the extreme left side of the road. At that time, the Tipper lorry bearing Registration No.TN-47-AV-7342, insured with the appellant Insurance Company, was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed and dashed against the two-wheeler. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down, sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot.

2.2. The claimants therefore filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- with interest. It was stated that the deceased was aged about 34 years and was working as a Marketing Manager and Interior Decorator at Anandham Decorators, Joseph College Complex, Trichy earning more than Rs.25,000/- per month. It was also stated that the deceased had married only about four months prior to the accident.

2.3. The Insurance Company filed its counter disputing the manner of the accident, negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry and the quantum of compensation claimed.

2.4. Before the Tribunal, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined on the side of the claimants and Exs.P1 to P6 were marked. On the side of the respondents, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

3. Findings of the Tribunal:

3.1. Upon consideration of the evidence, particularly the evidence of P.W.2, an independent witness, and the FIR, the Tribunal fixed negligence on the driver of the insured lorry and awarded a sum of Rs.44,65,800/- as compensation on the following heads: Sl.No. Heads Amount in Rs

Loss of Dependency 30,72,000/-

Future Prospects 12,28,800/-

Loss of Consortium 1,32,000/-

Funeral Expenses 16,500/-

Loss of Estate 16,500/- Total 44,65,800/-

3.2. Aggrieved by the said award, the Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal, particularly questioning the assessment of the monthly income of the deceased.

4. Submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company:

4.1. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that there was no satisfactory documentary evidence to establish that the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. It was contended that the deceased was stated to be working as a Marketing Manager and Interior Decorator and that the nature of the work was not shown to be regular or supported by periodical salary receipts. According to the learned counsel, the Tribunal had nevertheless fixed the monthly income at Rs.24,000/-, which was excessive and unsupported by adequate evidence.

5. Submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents/Claimants:

5.1. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the claimants submitted that the claimants had produced the bank statement of the deceased, marked as Ex.P5, which established the income received by him. P.W.1 had also deposed regarding the

occupation and income of the deceased. Therefore, it was submitted that the Tribunal had correctly assessed the monthly income at Rs.24,000/-.

6. This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the records.

7. The principal question that arises for consideration is whether the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- requires interference?

8. Discussion and findings:

8.1. Ex.P5 is the bank statement of the deceased. P.W.1 has deposed that the deceased was earning about Rs.25,000/- per month as a Marketing Manager and Interior Decorator. However, apart from the bank statement, no concrete documentary evidence such as salary certificate, appointment order, employment records or regular salary receipts had been produced to establish a fixed monthly income of Rs.25,000/-.

8.2. On perusal of Ex.P5, this Court finds that the credits in the bank account are not uniform to prove regular monthly receipts of Rs.25,000/-. The entries disclose receipts at different intervals and in varying amounts. Therefore, the bank statement, by itself, cannot be treated as conclusive proof of a fixed monthly income of Rs.25,000/- or even Rs.24,000/-.

8.3. At the same time, the absence of regular salary receipts does not mean that the deceased had no income. The evidence on record establishes that he was earning income out of job. In assessing income where exact documentary proof is not available, some reasonable estimation is necessarily involved. Such estimation should

neither be unduly conservative nor disproportionately high and must be based on the overall materials available on record.

8.4. Having regard to the occupation of the deceased, the evidence of P.W.1, the bank statement marked as Ex.P5 and the irregular nature of the credits reflected therein, this Court considers it reasonable to fix the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.20,000/-, instead of Rs.24,000/- fixed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, paragraph No.7 is answered.

9. Loss of Dependency

9.1. The deceased was aged about 34 years. Therefore, 40% is added towards future prospects. The monthly income, after adding future prospects, is accordingly calculated as follows: Rs.20,000 + 40% = Rs.28,000/-.

9.2. Since there were three dependants, namely, the wife and the parents of the deceased, one-third is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. Applying the multiplier of 16, the loss of dependency is calculated as follows: Rs.28,000 × 12 × 16 × 2/3 = Rs.35,84,000/-.

10. Conclusion:

10.1. The compensation under the other conventional heads is retained as follows:

Sl.No Heads Award of the Tribunal Re-quantified by this Court Status

Loss of Dependency 30,72,000/- 35,84,000/- Enhanced

Future Prospects 12,28,800/- ---- Reduced

Loss of Consortium 1,32,000/- 1,32,000/- Confirmed

Funeral Expenses 16,500/- 25,000/- Enhanced

Loss of Estate 16,500/- 16,500/- Confirmed Total 44,65,800/- 37,57,500/- Reduced

10.2. Thus, as per the above figures, the modified compensation works out to Rs.37,57,500/-.

10.3. Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.44,65,800/- is reduced to Rs.37,57,500/-.

10.4. Apportionment So far as apportionment is concerned, the deceased had married only about four months prior to the accident. Having regard to the relationship of the claimants and the circumstances of the case, the compensation may be apportioned among the claimants in the same proportion as determined by the Tribunal, subject to recalculation on the basis of the modified total compensation.

11. Result:

11.1. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.

11.2. The award dated 21.03.2025 in M.C.O.P.No.649 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Judge, Trichy is modified and the compensation is reduced from Rs.44,65,800/- to Rs.37,57,500/-, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition.

11.3. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the reduced award amount of Rs.37,57,500/-, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition, if not already deposited, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

11.4. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw their respective amounts apportioned by the Tribunal.

11.5. If the Insurance Company has already deposited any amount in excess of the modified award, it is entitled to withdraw the excess amount. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition, if any, is closed. 02-11-2026 To

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Judge, Trichy.

2. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN.J, sbn C.M.A.(MD).No.1006 of 2026 02.11.2026