Madras HC Cuts Fatal-Crash Award To ₹38.9 Lakh, Fixes 25-Year-Old Engineering Graduate’s Notional Income At ₹25,000, Rejecting Unproved ₹30,000 Salary

Shanmugapriyan, a 25-year-old Mechanical Engineering graduate undertaking an internship for a stipend of ₹12,000 per month, died from injuries sustained in a motorcycle collision on 29 May 2019.

His legal heirs claimed compensation, alleging that the collision resulted from the negligent riding of the other motorcycle.

The Tribunal found the other rider solely negligent and fixed the deceased’s monthly income at ₹30,000, based on his qualifications and internship evidence.

The insurer appealed, disputing the negligence finding and the income assessment

Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, an award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal may be challenged by appeal.

The Court assessed negligence on the evidence, including eyewitness testimony and the accident-related documents.

For a deceased engineering graduate, the Court relied on the cited Madras High Court decisions, including Venkateshwari v. K. Munikrishna and Rajkumar v. Munikrishna, in support of fixing notional income at ₹25,000 per month in a comparable case.

It applied National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi for the conventional consortium amount and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram for filial consortium, recognising parents’ entitlement to compensation for the loss of a child’s love, care and companionship.

The Court upheld the negligence finding because the Tribunal had considered the eyewitness’s evidence, the Motor Vehicle Inspector’s report, the observation mahazar and the rough sketch, while the insurer produced no oral evidence to rebut the claimants’ case.

It rejected the ₹30,000 monthly income assessment because neither an offer letter nor employer testimony substantiated that prospective salary.

However, given the deceased’s engineering degree, age and existing stipend, it fixed notional income at ₹25,000 per month, following the cited precedents.

Applying 40% future prospects, a 50% deduction for personal expenses and a multiplier of 18, the Court calculated loss of dependency at ₹37,80,000.

It also awarded ₹40,000 to each parent for filial consortium, reducing the Tribunal’s award under loss of love and affection accordingly.

The Court modified the compensation to ₹38,90,000, comprising ₹37,80,000 for loss of dependency, ₹15,000 for loss of estate, ₹15,000 for funeral expenses and ₹80,000 for loss of love and affection/filial consortium.

The judgment directed deposit of that sum, less any amount already deposited, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the claim-petition filing date until deposit, within eight weeks; the second claimant was permitted to withdraw the amount with accrued interest and costs, subject to adjustment for any sums already withdrawn.