CMA(MD)/867/2024 of K.Ramalakshmi Vs R.Krishnamoorthy on 2 November 2026

JUDGMENT

The claimants in M.C.O.P.No.68 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputhur has filed the present appeal in C.M.A.(MD).No.867 of 2024, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal by award dated 04.07.2023.

2. Since the present appeal is confined to the question of quantum, it is not necessary to deal in detail with the facts relating to negligence and liability. For the purpose of deciding the question of enhancement, the relevant facts are briefly set out hereunder.

3. Facts of the case:

3.1. The deceased, namely, Kali Muthu, was the husband and father of the claimants. The claimants filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for his death in the motor accident. The deceased was aged about 55 years and was stated to have been working as a mason and earning more than

Rs.24,000 per month.

3.2. On 02.06.2021 at about 4.00 p.m., the deceased, along with his friend Veerapandi, was proceeding in a two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-58-AT- 3423 on the Vendurayapuram-Duraisamipuram North-South Road, from east to west. At that time, the lorry bearing Registration No.KA-01-MT-7484, insured with the third respondent/Insurance Company, came from the north-south direction and hit the two-wheeler. In the accident, the deceased sustained injuries and was taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead. The Malli Police Station registered a case against the driver of the lorry in Crime No.52 of 2021 under Sections, 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code.

3.3. The Insurance Company filed its counter denying the manner of the accident and disputing the negligence attributed to the lorry driver. According to the Insurance Company, the rider of the two-wheeler alone was responsible for the accident and, therefore, the Insurance Company was not liable to pay compensation. The quantum of compensation was also disputed.

3.4. Before the Tribunal, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Exs.P1 to P28 were marked, on the side of the claimants. Ex.C1 was marked, there is no oral and documentary evidence was adduced on the side of the respondents.

4. Findings of the Tribunal:

4.1. Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal fixed the negligence upon the driver of the lorry bearing Registration No.KA-01-MT- 7484, insured with the third respondent/Insurance Company, and consequently fastened the liability upon the Insurance Company. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.8,96,964/- under the following heads with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition: Sl. No. Heads Amount in Rs

Loss of dependency 7,91,964/-

Loss of Love and affection 30,000/-

Loss of consortium for 1st petitioner 40,000/-

Loss of estate 15,000/-

Loss of Funeral Expenses 15,000/-

Transportation 5,000/- Total 8,96,964/-

4.2. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement.

5. Submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimants:

5.1. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants submitted that the deceased was working as a mason and was earning a substantial income. However, the Tribunal had adopted a very low notional income without properly considering the nature of his avocation and the prevailing wage levels. It was therefore contended that the monthly income requires to be suitably enhanced.

6. Submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent/Insurance company:

6.1. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that, in the absence of any documentary evidence establishing the actual income of the deceased, the Tribunal was justified in adopting a notional income and there is no need for interference with the award under the head of loss of dependency.

7. This Court considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8. Whether the Tribunal has correct in fixing the liability and awarded the compensation?

9. Discussion on negligence:

9.1. The death of the deceased in the accident is established through the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and the documentary evidence. The finding regarding negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry has not been seriously challenged in the present appeal. Hence, the liability of the Insurance Company is not in dispute for the purpose of determining the present appeal.

10. Quantum of Compensation:

10.1. As regard the income of the deceased, Ex.P5, the post-mortem certificate, indicates his age as about 58 years. The specific case of the claimants is that the deceased was working as a mason. Though the claimants have pleaded that he was earning more than Rs.24,000/- per month, no acceptable documentary evidence has been produced to establish the actual income.

10.2. In such circumstances, the absence of documentary proof of income cannot, by itself, justify adoption of an unduly low notional income. The Court is required to arrive at a reasonable assessment having regard to the nature of the avocation, the year of accident and the prevailing wage levels.

10.3. The accident in the present case occurred in the year 2021. The notional income adopted by the Tribunal is found to be on the lower side. Having regard to the avocation of the deceased as a mason and the year of accident, this

Court is inclined to fix the monthly income at Rs.11,000/-.

10.4. The deceased was aged 58 years. Therefore, applying the principles governing addition towards future prospects, 10% is added towards future prospects. Thus, the monthly income would be: Rs.11,000 + 10% = Rs.12,100/-.

10.5. Since there are two dependants, 1/3rd is liable to be deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. The contribution to the family would therefore be 2/3rd of Rs.12,100/-. Applying the appropriate multiplier of 9, the loss of dependency is recalculated as follows: Rs.12,100 × 2/3 × 12 × 9 = Rs.8,71,200/-.

10.6. Accordingly, the compensation under the head of loss of dependency is redetermined at Rs.8,71,200/-.

11. Discussion on Consortium

11.1. The wife of the deceased is entitled to spousal consortium. The other eligible claimant is also entitled to the appropriate consortium in accordance with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that the amounts under the conventional heads are liable to be suitably enhanced periodically. In view of the accident having occurred in the year

2021, the amount of Rs.40,000/- requires appropriate enhancement in accordance with the applicable principles. Accordingly, the consortium is recalculated at Rs.40,000/- for each eligible claimant, subject to the entitlement established from the record. The compensation under the other heads awarded by the Tribunal shall be considered in accordance with the applicable principles, and the total compensation shall be recalculated accordingly.

12. Conclusion:

12.1. Accordingly, the compensation under the conventional heads is recalculated as follows:

12.1.1. The first claimant, being the wife of the deceased, is awarded Rs.44,000/- towards spousal consortium. The second claimant is awarded Rs.44,000/- towards loss of affection and consortium, as applicable. A sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded towards loss of estate, Rs.25,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards transportation expenses.

12.1.2. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.8,96,964/- is enhanced to the amount determined herein. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of deposit.

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

Loss of dependency 7,91,964/- 8,71,200/- Enhanced

Loss of Love and affection 30,000/- 44,000/- Enhanced

Loss of consortium for 1st petitioner 40,000/- 44,000/- Enhanced

Loss of estate 15,000/- 15,000/- Confirmed

Funeral Expenses 15,000/- 25,000/- Enhanced

Transportation 5,000/- 10,000/- Enhanced Total 8,96,964/- 10,09,200/- Enhanced

12.2. For the reasons stated above, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal requires modification to the extent indicated herein.

13. Result:

13.1. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed.

13.2. The award dated 04.07.2023 in M.C.O.P.No.68 of 2021 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputhur is hereby modified and enhanced from Rs.8,96,964/- to Rs.10,09,200/- together with

interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition.

13.3. The Insurance Company is hereby directed to deposit the entire award amount of Rs.10,09,200/- 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.

13.4. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same, in accordance with law.

13.5. Further, the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the excess modified award amount, as fixed by the Tribunal, to the credit of the claimants in accordance with the law. There shall be no order as to costs. 02-11-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sbn

To

1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srivilliputhur.

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

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. sbn CMA(MD) No. 867 of 2024 02-11-2026