Facts
Gurusamy died after a KPN bus struck him while he was standing at a bus stop on 14 July 2023.
Source reference: pp. 2–6The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal found the bus driver negligent and awarded ₹15,15,800, including ₹13,06,800 for loss of dependency, based on a notional monthly income of ₹12,000.
Source reference: pp. 2–6His dependants appealed, contending that the income was too low because he worked as a mason and seeking enhancement.
Source reference: pp. 2–6The insurer opposed the appeal, arguing that the income was properly assessed in the absence of proof.
Source reference: pp. 2–6Issues
Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of Gurusamy’s notional monthly income at ₹12,000 should be enhanced, having regard to his work as a mason and the absence of documentary proof of earnings.
Source reference: pp. 6–7Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal should be modified accordingly.
Source reference: pp. 7–8Law Applied
Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an aggrieved claimant may appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal.
Source reference: no citationIn assessing compensation for loss of dependency, Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 (2) TN MAC 1 (SC), governs the applicable multiplier and deduction for personal expenses; National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (2) TN MAC 609 (SC), governs the addition for future prospects.
Source reference: pp. 5, 7The Court applied a 10% addition for future prospects, a one-fourth deduction for personal expenses, and a multiplier of 11.
Source reference: pp. 5, 7Reasoning
The Court treated negligence as undisputed and identified the income assessment as the central grievance.
Source reference: pp. 6–7Although the claimants asserted earnings of ₹40,000 per month, they produced no independent evidence to substantiate that amount.
Source reference: p. 7Nevertheless, considering the accident occurred in 2023 and that masonry was skilled work, the Court found the Tribunal’s ₹12,000 assessment too low and fixed monthly income at ₹20,000.
Source reference: p. 7Applying the cited principles, it added 10% for future prospects, deducted one-fourth for personal expenses, and used a multiplier of 11, resulting in loss of dependency of ₹21,78,000.
Source reference: pp. 7–8It left the Tribunal’s awards under the conventional heads unchanged.
Source reference: p. 8Holding
The appeal was partly allowed.
The total compensation was enhanced from ₹15,15,800 to ₹23,87,000, comprising ₹21,78,000 for loss of dependency and the confirmed amounts for funeral expenses, loss of estate, and loss of consortium.
Source reference: p. 8The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum from the claim petition date until deposit, together with applicable costs and subject to credit for amounts already deposited, within eight weeks.
Source reference: pp. 8–9The Tribunal was directed to calculate and disburse the amount after adjustments; the claimants must pay any court fee due on the enhancement.
Source reference: pp. 8–9Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Motor Vehicles Act, 19881
Original Court PDF
DhanalakshmivsSumathi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
