Madras HC Raises Motorcyclist’s Family’s Compensation To ₹23.15 Lakh, Cuts His Contributory Negligence From 10% To 5%

Kesavan died from injuries sustained in a collision between his motorcycle and a Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus on 25 February 2022.

His wife, sons and mother sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The Tribunal found the bus driver negligent but attributed 10% contributory negligence to Kesavan because he did not hold a valid driving licence. It awarded ₹18,42,750 after that deduction.

The Corporation appealed the quantum; the claimants challenged the negligence finding and sought enhancement.

The claim was brought under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the appeals under Section 173.

For calculating dependency, the Court applied Smt. Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, under which the multiplier is determined by the deceased’s age; it held that multiplier 11 applied to a deceased aged 53.

The Court also applied a 10% addition for future prospects and a one-fourth deduction for personal and living expenses in calculating dependency.

It referred to Kulavani v. Kathirvelan in connection with the Tribunal’s negligence finding and noted the claimants’ reliance on Sri Krishna Kanta Singh v. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited and Others.

The judgment does not set out a separate legal test for attributing contributory negligence based on absence of a driving licence.

The Court reduced the deceased’s contributory negligence from 10% to 5%, holding that the Tribunal’s assessment required interference. Although the claimants had not produced a copy of the deceased’s driving licence, the Court considered his age and status as a hotel proprietor in reaching that conclusion.

On quantum, it found ₹15,000 per month too low in light of the accident year and the deceased’s age, but declined to accept the claimed ₹50,000 monthly income because the income-tax material included profit share and other income and did not establish that monthly figure.

It fixed notional income at ₹20,000, added 10% future prospects, applied multiplier 11 and deducted one-fourth for personal expenses, yielding ₹21,78,000 for loss of dependency.

It also enhanced consortium and added transportation expenses.

The Corporation was directed to deposit the enhanced amount, less any amount already deposited, within six weeks; the Tribunal’s apportionment and disbursement directions remained in force.