The Oriental Insurance Compa vs Ravi,
- Court
- Madras High Court
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJNISH PATHIYIL
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
CNR:{HCMD011271522022}
AND
CMP(MD) No. 2300 of 2023
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited,
Having its Office at Pulimottil Building,
P.B. 17, Post Office Junction,
Punalur,
Kerala State. ..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Ravi
2. Pitchammal
3. S. Suresh
4. Ranjith ..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 173 of Motor
Vehicles Act to set aside the order of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal Cum Additional District Court, (FTC), Tenkasi made in
M.C.O.P. No. 36/2020 dated 20/09/2022 and allow this appeal with cost.
For Petitioner(s) :M/s E.Chandrasekaran
For Respondent(s) :M/s. P. Balasubramanian, for R-2
No appearance – R-1, R-3 & R-4
__________
Page 1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAJNISH PATHIYIL J.)
The challenge in the appeal is to the order dated 29.05.2022
in M.C.O.P. No. 36 of 2020 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Tenkasi (Additional District Court, FTC, Tenkasi).
2. The parties are referred to according to their respective
status before the Tribunal to avoid any ambiguity.
3. The brief averments set out in the claim petition are as
follows: On 29.05.2019, at about 4.30 p.m., the victim, namely,
Shanmugapriyan (deceased), was riding a Honda Activa motorcycle
bearing Registration No. TN 76 E 2064, with a pillion rider, along the
Elathur–Sengottai Road from south to north, keeping to the left side of
the road and observing the traffic rules and regulations. At that time, the
first respondent, Suresh, was riding a motorcycle bearing Registration
No. KL 25 M 286 from north to south in the opposite direction. The said
motorcycle belonged to the second respondent, Ranjith, and was insured
with the third respondent. It is alleged that the first respondent rode the
motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle ridden
__________
Page 2 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
by the deceased, as a result of which both the deceased and the pillion
rider were thrown off their motorcycle. The deceased sustained serious
injuries all over his body and was initially taken to the Elathur
Government Hospital. He was thereafter referred to the Tenkasi
Government Hospital and subsequently to the Tirunelveli Government
Hospital for further treatment, where he succumbed to his injuries on
31.05.2019.
4. It is contended that the accident occurred solely due to the
rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by the first respondent.
Hence, the legal heirs of the deceased, Shanmugapriyan, filed the claim
petition seeking compensation.
5. The claim petition was contested by the third
respondent/insurance company, whereas the first and second respondents
remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. The Tribunal framed the
following three issues for consideration:
1. Whether the accident was occurred due to rash and
st
negligent riding of the 1 respondent?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to get any
compensation?
3. What is the quantum of the compensation that the
petitioners are entitled to?
4. Who is liable to pay compensation?
__________
Page 3 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
6. With regard to the first issue, P.W.1 was examined, and
Exs. P-1 to P-10 were marked through P.W.1. P.W.2 was also examined,
and Ex. P-11 was marked through P.W.2. On behalf of the third
respondent, no witness was examined. However, Exs. R-1 and R-2 were
marked through P.W.1 during his cross-examination. Upon considering
the entire gamut of facts, the documents, and the oral and documentary
evidence adduced, the Tribunal concluded that the accident occurred
solely due to the rash and negligent riding of the offending motorcycle by
the first respondent.
7. The Tribunal also took into consideration the fact that
P.W.2, an eyewitness to the accident, had been examined. Further, the
Tribunal examined the Motor Vehicle Inspector's Report which was
marked as Ex. P-3, the Observation Mahazar which was marked as Ex.
P-8, and the rough sketch dated 29.05.2019 which was marked as Ex.
R-1. The third respondent did not adduce any oral evidence, nor was the
first respondent examined as a witness.
8. In the light of the above, we find no reason to differ from
the view taken by the Tribunal, as it has duly considered the entire gamut
of evidence and arrived at a correct conclusion on the issue of negligence.
__________
Page 4 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
9. With regard to the quantum of compensation, the
deceased was admittedly a graduate in Mechanical Engineering and was
working at Turbo Engineering Private Limited, Paiyanor, Kerala, where
he was earning a stipend of Rs. 12,000/- per month. He had been selected
for employment and offered a salary of Rs.30,000/- per month upon
completion of his internship. The claimants marked Ex. P-9, the degree
certificate of the deceased, and Ex. P-10, the internship certificate issued
by his employer. Based on these documents, the Tribunal concluded that
the notional monthly income of the deceased should be fixed at Rs.
30,000/-.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would
submit that the determination of the notional income by the Tribunal
suffers from infirmity, as no documentary evidence had been produced to
establish that the deceased would have earned Rs. 30,000/- per month.
Exs.P-9 and P-10 merely establish that the deceased was a qualified
engineer and was receiving a stipend of Rs. 12,000/- per month.
According to the learned counsel, these documents cannot form the basis
for concluding that the deceased was earning Rs. 30,000/- per month.
__________
Page 5 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
11. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the
claimants would submit that judicial notice may be taken of the fact that
the deceased was 25 years of age on the date of the accident, i.e.,
29.05.2019. Being a graduate in Mechanical Engineering and already
receiving a stipend of Rs. 12,000/- per month, as established by Ex. P-10,
the deceased would reasonably have earned Rs. 30,000/- per month upon
completion of his internship.
12. Admittedly, in the present case, no other document,
including an offer letter, was marked to establish the proposed monthly
salary of Rs. 30,000/-. Further, the employer who intended to engage the
deceased was not examined to substantiate the claim regarding his
prospective income. In the absence of such oral and documentary
evidence, we are unable to accept the Tribunal's finding with regard to the
monthly income of the deceased. However, considering that the deceased
was a graduate in Mechanical Engineering, and that he was 25 years of
age, and was already receiving a stipend of Rs. 12,000/- per month, by
taking into account the precedents on the subject, we hold that the
notional monthly income of the deceased should be fixed at Rs. 25,000/-
instead of Rs. 30,000/-, as determined by the Tribunal. Since the annual
__________
Page 6 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
income is less than three lakhs, it would fall below the applicable tax
slabs, and hence there can be no deduction on account of tax.
13. In this regard, it is relevant to refer to the judgment of
the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in Venkateshwari
v. K. Munikrishna, CMA No.1231 of 2025 dated 19.01.2026. The
relevant portion of the judgement are extracted as follows:
“ 6. On a perusal of the materials available on record, it is not
disputed that the deceased was aged 26 years at the time of accident and
was an Engineering Graduate. Ex.P-6 (provisional certificate) is also
filed to prove that the deceased was an Engineering Graduate at the
relevant point of time. Ex.P-7 - B.E. degree certificate is also produced
to show that he is an Engineering Graduate. However, the Tribunal,
without considering the aspect of the deceased being an Engineering
Graduate, had taken the notional income at Rs.10,000/- on the ground
that no proof of income on the part of the deceased, is produced by the
claimants.
7. It is relevant to note that a Division Bench of this Court in
C.M.A.No.898 of 2025 (Rajkumar and 2 others Vs. Munikrishna and
another), dated 17.12.2025, in regard to the pillion rider, had fixed the
notional income at Rs.25,000/- and in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said
judgment, the Division Bench, held as under:
"5. As has been held by a Division Bench in the judgment
reported in 2021 1 TNMAC 727 in the case of New India
Assurance Limited Vs. Mr.K.Velmurugan , the notional income
of the Engineering final year student has been fixed at
Rs.25,000/- per month. In the present case, the deceased had
been completed his Engineering Degree. Hence, the notional
income of the deceased ought to have been taken as
Rs.25,000/-, but the Court below had ignored Ex.P-11 and
had given a categorical finding that the deceased is only a
Diploma holder in Computer Designing to arrive at the
__________
Page 7 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
income of the deceased. Hence, we are of the view that the
impugned order is liable to be interfered with.
6. In the compensation granted under the head 'love and
affection', it is to be seen that the appellants are the father
and brothers of the deceased. As per the judgment of the
Honourable Apex Court in National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others , reported in (2017) 16
SCC 680, Rs.40,000/- per head had been fixed under the head
of loss of love and affection/consortium."
8. Considering the above said judgment, the Division Bench of this
Court enhanced the compensation by fixing the notional income at the
rate of Rs.25,000/- per month to the pillion rider, who was also similarly
placed person as an Engineering Graduate.
9. Accordingly, we are also inclined to enhance the compensation by
fixing the notional income of the deceased at Rs.25,000/-, though the
Apex Court had also adopted the same in a similar case wherein the
accident taken place in the year 2010, in Civil Appeal No.7180 of 2022
(arising out of SLP(C).No.10206 of 2020) (S.Vasanthi and another Vs.
M/s.Adhiparasakthi Engg. College and another), dated 11.10.2022,
considering the fact that the pillion rider who was also an Engineering
Graduate and of similar age, the Division Bench has already fixed the
compensation based on Rs.25,000/- as notional income, we are also
inclined to adopt the same methodology to maintain the parity.
10. Accordingly, we also fix Rs.25,000/- as the notional income of the
deceased, as held by the Division Bench in the case of Rajkumar and 2
others Vs. Munikrishna (supra).”
14. Accordingly, the loss of dependency is recomputed as follows:
Income (as modified) Rs.25,000/-
ADD : Future Prospectus as 40% Rs.25,000 x 40% =Rs.10,000/-
Rs.25,000 + 10,000 =Rs.35,000/-
DEDUCT : ½ of Income Rs.35,000-17,500 =Rs.17,500/-
TOTAL Rs.17,500/-
Loss of Dependency Rs.17500 x 18 x 12
=Rs.37,80,000/-
__________
Page 8 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Magma General
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, while
dealing with the issue of consortium, held as follows:
21. A Constitution Bench of this Court in Pranay Sethi
[National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680 :
(2018) 3 SCC (Civ) 248 : (2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 205] dealt with the
various heads under which compensation is to be awarded in a death
case. One of these heads is loss of consortium. In legal parlance,
“consortium” is a compendious term which encompasses “spousal
consortium”, “parental consortium”, and “filial consortium”. The
right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort,
guidance, solace and affection of the deceased, which is a loss to his
family. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations
with the deceased spouse: [Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh, (2013) 9 SCC
54 : (2013) 4 SCC (Civ) 179 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 817 : (2014) 1
SCC (L&S) 149]
21.1. Spousal consortium is generally defined as
rights pertaining to the relationship of a husband-wife
which allows compensation to the surviving spouse for
loss of “company, society, cooperation, affection, and
aid of the other in every conjugal relation”. [Black's
Law Dictionary (5th Edn., 1979).]
21.2. Parental consortium is granted to the child
upon the premature death of a parent, for loss of
“parental aid, protection, affection, society, discipline,
guidance and training”.
21.3. Filial consortium is the right of the parents
to compensation in the case of an accidental death of a
child. An accident leading to the death of a child
causes great shock and agony to the parents and
family of the deceased. The greatest agony for a parent
is to lose their child during their lifetime. Children are
valued for their love, affection, companionship and
their role in the family unit.
__________
Page 9 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
22. Consortium is a special prism reflecting changing norms
about the status and worth of actual relationships. Modern
jurisdictions world-over have recognised that the value of a child's
consortium far exceeds the economic value of the compensation
awarded in the case of the death of a child. Most jurisdictions
therefore permit parents to be awarded compensation under loss of
consortium on the death of a child. The amount awarded to the
parents is a compensation for loss of the love, affection, care and
companionship of the deceased child.
23. The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed
at providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of
genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child,
or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be
awarded loss of consortium under the head of filial consortium.
Parental consortium is awarded to children who lose their parents
in motor vehicle accidents under the Act. A few High Courts have
awarded compensation on this count [ Rajasthan High Court in
Jagmala Ram v. Sohi Ram, 2017 SCC OnLine Raj 3848 : (2017) 4
RLW 3368; Uttarakhand High Court in Rita Rana v. Pradeep
Kumar, 2013 SCC OnLine Utt 2435 : (2014) 3 UC 1687; Karnataka
High Court in Lakshman v. Susheela Chand Choudhary, 1996 SCC
OnLine Kar 74 : (1996) 3 Kant LJ 570] . However, there was no
clarity with respect to the principles on which compensation could
be awarded on loss of filial consortium.
24. The amount of compensation to be awarded as
consortium will be governed by the principles of awarding
compensation under “loss of consortium” as laid down in Pranay
Sethi [National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC
680 : (2018) 3 SCC (Civ) 248 : (2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 205] . In the
present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the
sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs 40,000 each for loss of filial
consortium.
16. As regards compensation awarded under the heads of
loss of estate, funeral expenses, and loss of love and affection, the
amounts awarded by the Tribunal under the respective heads cannot be
__________
Page 10 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
sustained in their entirety. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Sarla Verma and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and
Another, reported in (2009) 2 TN MAC 1 (SC), the compensation of
Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded under the head of loss of love and affection
requires reconsideration, though the claimants are the father and mother
of the deceased. Though the first claimant is the father of the deceased,
the Tribunal has concluded that, considering the fact that the first
claimant (father) was below 60 years of age, he was not a dependent and,
accordingly, has not awarded any compensation to him under the head of
loss of dependency. However, under the head of loss of love and
affection, both the claimants are entitled to compensation in accordance
with the dictum laid down in Sarala Verma (as stated supra). It is
imperative that filial consortium be awarded to the parents in the event of
the death of their child, as compensation for the loss of the child's love,
affection, care, and companionship. Having regard to the applicable
principles governing compensation under this head, we award a sum of
Rs. 40,000/-to each of the claimants under the said head. Accordingly, the
compensation awarded towards loss of love and affection stands reduced
by Rs. 80,000/-in all.
__________
Page 11 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
17. Accordingly, the award passed by the Tribunal is
modified as follows:
Rs.37,80,000/-
Loss of Estate [Confirmed] Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral Expenses [Confirmed] Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of Dependency [Modified]
Loss of Love and Affection [Modified] Rs. 80,000/-
TOTAL Rs.38,90,000/-
18. In fine, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed
in the above terms. The appellant/Transport Corporation is directed to
deposit the total compensation amount of Rs.38,90,000/- (less the amount,
if any, already deposited), together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per
annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of deposit,
to the credit of M.C.O.P. No. 36 of 2020, on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, Tenkasi, within a
period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. Upon such deposit, together with the accrued interest, the
second claimant is permitted to withdraw the award amount, along with
interest and costs, after adjusting any amount already withdrawn, by
filing an appropriate application before the Tribunal. There shall be no
__________
Page 12 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
(A.Q.,J.) (R.P.L.,J.)
30-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
KSA
Copy To:
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tenkasi
(Additional District Court, FTC, Tenkasi).
2. The Section Officer ( VR Section ),
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 13 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
AND
RAJNISH PATHIYIL, J.
KSA
CMA(MD) No. 207 of 2023
30-10-2026
__________
Page 14 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 07:15:47 pm )