Renuka vs K. Rajesh
- Court
- Madras High Court
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012381352026}
Renuka
W/o.Murali
No.21, T.T.C.Nagar, Adhanur
Guduvancherry
Chengalpattu 603 202
..Appellant(s)
Vs
1. K. Rajesh
S/o.Kanagaraj
No.54/1, Syful Mulk Street
Pudupet, Chennai 600 002.
2. IFFCO TOKIO General
Insurance company Ltd.,
IFFCO Bhavan 4th Floor
No.128, Habibullah Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 to allow the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by enhancing the
compensation awarded in the Judgment and Decree dated 18-04-2024 passed in
MCOP.No.3155 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Chennai (I Special Court, Small Causes Court, Chennai).
For Appellant(s): Mr.K.Balaji
For Respondent(s): M/s. S. Srinivasan For R1 and R2
__________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
JUDGMENT
Unsuccessful claimant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation, vide award dated 18.04.2026 made in MCOP.No.3155 of 2024,
on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Special Court), Small
Causes Court, Chennai. Claim Petition has been filed under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation by the dependent of the deceased
one Murali, who died in a road accident.
2. According to the claimant, who is the wife of the deceased Murali, on
27.10.2023 at 16.10 hours, after finishing his works, while the deceased was
trying to cross the GST Road, opposite to Renault Car Showroom, Vallancheri,
Tambaram District, a two wheeler bearing Reg.No. TN 01 BP 4555, driven by
its rider in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased, due to
which the deceased sustained fatal injuries. Despite treatment at Chengalpattu
Hospital, the injured Murali died.
st
3. The 1 respondent therein / owner of the offending vehicle was called
absent and set exparte before the Tribunal.
nd
4. The 2 respondent therein / Insurance Company has filed a counter
statement denying the manner of accident.
__________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
5. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the claimant, the claimant herself was
examined as PW1 and one Saravanakumar, an eye witness was examined as
PW3 and Exs.P1 to P14 were marked. On the side of the respondents, neither
any witness was examined nor any document was marked.
6. Upon appreciation of evidence adduced on either side, the Tribunal
found that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the rider of
the two wheeler. The Tribunal, considering the age of the deceased was 58
years at the time of accident as evidenced from Ex.P13 - Driving Licence of the
deceased, wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 20.06.1965 and in the
absence of proof of income, fixed a sum of Rs.17,500/- as the monthly notional
income of the deceased, added 10% towards Future Prospects, deduced 1/2th
towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, applied Multiplier “9” by
considering the age of the deceased and accordingly awarded compensation of
Rs.10,39,500/- under the head Loss of Dependency. The Tribunal has also
awarded compensation under various other heads as hereunder:
Heads of Compensation Amount awarded by
the Tribunal (Rs.)
Loss of Dependency
[17,500 + 10% Future Prospects ] =19,250 x 12 x 9
= 20,79,000 x ½
10,39,500
Loss of Consortium 48,000
Loss of Estate 18,000
Funeral Expenses 18,000
TOTAL 11,23,500
__________
Page 3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
Being aggrieved over the same, the claimant has preferred the present Appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant / claimant would
submit that the Tribunal erroneously fixed the notional income of the deceased
as Rs.17,500/- per month without any basis. The Tribunal ought to have fixed
the income of the deceased as Rs.25,000/- per month, since the deceased was a
driver and earning Rs.25,000/- per month at the time of accident. The Tribunal
erroneously taken the age of the deceased as 58 years as per the Driving
Licence. The Tribunal ought to have taken the age of the deceased as 55 years
as per Ex.P5 – Postmortem Certificate and Ex.P6- Aadhar Card. The Tribunal
erroneously deducted 50% towards personal expenses and ought to have
rd
deducted 1/3 deduction as personal expenses, as the claimant being widowed
wife of the deceased wholly depending upon the income of the deceased.
nd
8. Per contra , learned counsel appearing for the 2 respondent /
Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal has relied upon Ex.P13-
Driving Licence, wherein the date of birth of the deceased was mentioned as
20.06.1965 and rightly fixed the age of the deceased as 58 years at the time of
accident. The claimant was working as a driver, earning a sum of Rs.25,000/-
per month and in the absence of proof of monthly income, the Tribunal has
rightly fixed Rs.17,500/- per month and arrived the compensation for the loss of
__________
Page 4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
dependency and other heads, which does not require any interference by this
Court.
9. This Court considered the submissions made on either side and
carefully perused the entire materials available on record.
10. There is no dispute with regard to the manner of accident and
negligence fixed on the part of the rider of the two wheeler. It is seen from
records that as per Ex.P5 – Death Report, Ex.P6 – Postmortem Certificate and
Ex.P7 – Death Certificate, wherein the age of the deceased was shown as 55
years at the time of accident. According to the claimant, the deceased was
working as Driver and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- at the time of accident and
to substantiate the age of the deceased, the claimant has relied upon Ex.P13-
Driving Licence of the deceased wherein the date of birth of the deceased was
shown as 20.06.1965 and therefore, the Tribunal has rightly taken the age of the
deceased as 58 years at the time of accident and the findings of the Tribunal
with regard to fixing the age of the deceased does not require any interference.
11. With regard to quantum of compensation, in the absence of proof of
monthly income, the Tribunal has fixed Rs.17,500/-as monthly notional income
of the deceased. Considering that the accident took place on 27.10.2023 and the
cost of living at that time and also considering the fact that the deceased was
__________
Page 5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
holding a four wheeler driving licence for driving light motor vehicle, this Court
is inclined to fix Rs.20,000/- per month as the monthly notional income of the
deceased. Considering the number of dependents, 50% was deducted towards
personal living expenses of the deceased and by applying the Multiplier “9” as
per the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sarla
Verma v, Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC 121], and adding 10%
towards future prospects by relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and Others
[(2017) 16 SCC 680] , the compensation under Loss of Dependency would
comes to Rs.11,88,000/- [20,000 + 10% = 22,000 x 12 x 9 = 23,76,000 x ½].
The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards Transportation
Charges, therefore this Court is inclined to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards
Transportation Charges. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
other heads appears to be just and proper and does not require any interference.
12. Thus, the Compensation now determined by this Court is tabulated
hereunder:
Heads of Compensation Amount awarded by this
Court (Rs.)
Loss of Dependency
[20,000 + 10% Future Prospects ] =22,000 x 12
x 9 = 23,76,000 x ½
11,88,000
Loss of Consortium 48,000
Loss of Estate 18,000
Funeral Expenses 18,000
Transportation Charges 10,000
Total 12,82,000
__________
Page 6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is partly allowed and
the award dated 18.04.2026 made in MCOP.No.3155 of 2024, on the file of the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I Special Court), Small Causes Court,
Chennai is modified to the effect that the claimant is entitled to an enhanced
compensation of Rs.12,82,000/- together with interest @ 7.5% p.a. from the
nd
date of claim petition till the date of deposit. The 2 respondent / Insurance
Company is directed to deposit the compensation now determined by this Court,
less amount already deposited if any, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to
withdraw the same, less amount already withdrawn if any, on filing appropriate
application before the Tribunal and on payment of Court fees for the enhanced
compensation. The claimant is not entitled for any interest on the enhanced
compensation for the default period. No costs.
03-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Jvm
To
The
1. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
(I Special Court), Small Causes Court, Chennai
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
__________
Page 7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
Jvm
CMA No. 3585 of 2026
03-11-2026
__________
Page 8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:21:13 pm )