The Branch Maanger Vs Sornam

..Appellant / 2^nd respondent Vs. 1. Sornam 2. Annadurai 3. Vinitha 4. Chiristopher Samuel ..Respondent(s) Cause title in CMA No.2600 of 2025: 1.Sornam 2.Annadurai 3.Vinitha ..Appellants/Petitioners Vs. 1.Chiristopher Samuel

¶12

Page1 of 9

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶15

2.The Branch Manager Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., No.6, Reliance House, 4^th Floor, Haddows Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006.

¶16

...Respondents

¶17

Prayer in CMA No.1413 of 2026: This appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1998, to set aside the order dated 15.10.2024 passed in M.C.O.P.No.559 of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court (FTC), Kancheepuram.

¶18

Prayer in CMA No.2600 of 2025: This appeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1998, to enhance the amount awarded in M.C.O.P.No.559 of 2019 dated 15.10.2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court (FTC), Kancheepuram.

¶19

For Appellant(s): Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan in CMA No.1413 of 2026

¶20

Mr.V.Varadha Kamaraj in CMA No.2600 of 2025

¶21

For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Varadha Kamaraj for R1 to R3 in CMA No.1413 of 2026

¶22

Mr.P.Suresh Srinivasan in CMA No.2600 of 2025 for R2

¶23

Page2 of 9

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶26

COMMON JUDGMENT

¶27

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.Karthikeyan J.)

¶28

C.M.A.No.1413 of 2026 has been filed by the appellant – Insurance

¶29

Company against the award dated 15.10.2024 made in M.C.O.P No.599 of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court

¶30

(FTC), Kancheepuram.

¶31

2.C.M.A.No.2600 of 2025 has been filed by the appellants – petitioners seeking enhancement of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 15.10.2024 made in M.C.O.P.No.599 of 2019 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court (FTC), Kancheepuram.

¶32

3.Both the appeals arise out of same accident and same award and hence, disposed of by this common judgment.

¶33

4.For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranks in the claim petition.

¶34

The petitioners filed M.C.O.P. No.559 of 2019 claiming a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation for the death of the deceased, who died in the road accident that took place on 01.01.2019.

¶35

__________ Page3 of 9

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶38

According to the petitioners, on 01.01.2019 at about 1.40 P.M., while the deceased Vinu was riding his two-wheeler bearing Registration No. TN-60Q-9163 from Shahin Gobin to Sriperumbudur Road on the extreme left side, observing the traffic rules, a PSV vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-22BC-8608 belonging to the 1^st respondent was driven by him in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased's two-wheeler, as a result of which, the deceased died at the spot itself. The petitioners contended that the 1^st respondent, being the owner/driver of the offending vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-22-BC-8608, and the 2^nd respondent, being the insurer thereof, are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners together with interest and costs.

¶39

The 1st respondent, who is the owner/driver of the offending vehicle, was called absent and was set ex-parte. He has not chosen to contest the petition.

¶40

The 2nd respondent – Insurance Company has not filed any counter statement and has not chosen to contest the petition. Accordingly, it was also set ex-parte.

¶41

During trial, on the side of the petitioners, the 1^st petitioner Sornam was examined as PW-1, one Ilangovan was examined as PW-2, and one Jaivinoth was examined as PW-3. Exs. P1 to P20 were marked on the side of the

¶42

Page4 of 9

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶45

petitioners. On the side of the respondents, no witness was examined and no document was marked.

¶46

10.The Tribunal, considering the pleadings and oral and documentary evidence, held that the 1^st and 2^nd respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners.

¶47

11.Challenging the liability fastened on the Insurance company, as well as the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal in the award dated 15.10.2024 made in M.C.O.P.No.559 of 2019, the 2^nd respondent-Insurance Company has filed this appeal in C.M.A.No.1413 of 2026.

¶48

12.Not being satisfied with the awarded granted by the Tribunal in the

¶49

award dated 15.10.2024 made in M.C.O.P.No.559 of 2019 the petitioners have filed the appeal in C.M.A.No.2600 of 2025.

¶50

13.Heard both sides.

¶51

14.The Insurance Company / appellant herein have filed the appeal

¶52

raising grounds of negligence and on the quantum of the award passed. On the issue of negligence, however, the claimants have examined PW-2 who had

¶53

Page5 of 9

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶56

spoken about the nature of the accident. We find no reason to disagree with the said evidence recorded.

¶57

15.So far as the quantum is concerned, the claimants have produced Ex.P12, the copy of the salary certificate which indicated that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.15,200/- per month and that the deduction of Rs.500/- had been made, which was paid as bus allowance. The Tribunal had fixed the income at Rs.14,700/-. To speak about the salary certificate, the claimants had also examined PW-3 / employer. We would confirm the monthly income determined by the Tribunal, in view of the evidence produced.

¶58

16.One further aspect raised on behalf of the claimants is the grant of consortium of Rs.44,000/-. When there were three claimants namely, the parents and younger sister of the deceased, applying the judgment Pranay Sethi reported in 2017 (16) SCC 680 , the consortium of Rs.40,000/- is granted to each one of the three claimants, since three years period has not been completed from the date of the judgment of Pranay Sethi referred supra. We would increase that head to Rs.1,20,000/- We would also decrease the other heads of Funeral Expenses from Rs.16,500/- to Rs.15,000/- and Loss of Estate from Rs.16,500/to Rs.15,000/-.

¶59

__________ Page6 of 9

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶62

17.Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as

¶63

follows:

¶64

S.No	Description	Amount awarded by Tribunal (Rs)	Amount awarded by this Court (Rs)	Award confirmed or enhanced or granted
1.	Loss of Dependency	Rs.22,22,640/-	Rs.22,22,640/-	Confirmed
2.	Loss of Consortium	Rs.44,000/-	Rs.1,20,000/-	Enhanced
3.	Funeral Expenses	Rs.16,500/-	Rs.15,000/-	Reduced
4.	Loss of Estate	Rs.16,500/-	Rs.15,000/-	Reduced
5.	Transport Charges	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.10,000/-	Confirmed
	Total	Rs.23,09,640/-	Rs.23,82,640/-	Enhanced by Rs.73,000/-

¶65

18.In the result, both C.M.A.No.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025 are disposed of. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.23,09,640/- is hereby enhanced to Rs.23,82,640/- together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum (excluding the default period if any) from the date of petition till the date of realization. The 2^nd respondent – Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award amount now determined by this Court, along with interest and costs, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.559 of

¶66

Page7 of 9

¶67

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶68

CMA Nos.1413 of 2026 & 2600 of 2025

¶69

2019, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, (FTC), Kanchipuram. On such deposit, the petitioners are permitted to withdraw their respective share of the award amount now determined by this

¶70

Court, as per the ratio of apportionment fixed by the Tribunal, along with proportionate interest and costs, less the amount if any, already withdrawn by making necessary applications before the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶71

(C.V.K.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) 08.06.2026

¶72

smv

¶73

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶74

To

¶75

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, (FTC), Kanchipuram.

¶76

__________ Page8 of 9