Madras High Court
Transport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Notional income fixed at ₹10,000 monthly despite absent proof for a 2020 fatal accident.

AMUDHA vs K.RANGANATHAN

Madras High CourtJUDGMENT: October 07, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Notional income fixed at ₹10,000 monthly despite absent proof for a 2020 fatal accident.. AMUDHA vs K.RANGANATHAN. Madras High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The claimants—the deceased’s wife, son and daughter—sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for his death in a road accident on 16 October 2020.

Source reference: p.2

The Tribunal found the offending vehicle’s driver solely negligent and awarded ₹4,72,028, assessing the deceased’s monthly income at ₹7,000 and applying a multiplier of 7 after deducting one-third for personal expenses.

Source reference: p.2–4

The claimants appealed under Section 173, contending that the deceased’s income as a security guard was understated and that compensation should be awarded for the children’s loss of love and affection.

Source reference: p.4–5
02

Issues

1. Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s monthly income at ₹7,000 should be enhanced in the absence of documentary proof of income.

Source reference: p.5–6

2. Whether the second and third claimants were entitled to compensation for loss of love and affection.

Source reference: p.6
03

Law Applied

Sections 166 and 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, respectively provide for a claim for compensation arising from a motor-vehicle accident and an appeal against an award of the Claims Tribunal.

Source reference: p.5–7

In assessing compensation, the Court considered the evidence of income, the deceased’s age, and the appropriate deduction for personal expenses and multiplier in calculating loss of dependency.

Source reference: p.5–7

The judgment refers generally to the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court but identifies no specific precedent.

Source reference: p.7
04

Reasoning

The deceased’s identity card did not, without supporting evidence, establish the claimed monthly income of ₹15,000.

Source reference: p.5–6

Nevertheless, given the accident’s occurrence in 2020 and the deceased’s age of 65, the Court considered ₹7,000 inadequate and fixed notional monthly income at ₹10,000.

Source reference: p.5–6

Applying a one-third deduction and multiplier of 7, it recalculated loss of dependency at ₹5,60,000.

Source reference: p.7

As the Tribunal had awarded nothing for the children’s loss of love and affection, the Court awarded ₹40,000 to each of them; it left the other heads undisturbed.

Source reference: p.6
05

Holding

The appeal was partly allowed, and the total compensation was enhanced from ₹4,72,028 to ₹7,20,000, with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of the claim petition until deposit, excluding any period of default.

The Insurance Company was directed to deposit the enhanced award, interest and costs, less any amount already deposited, within six weeks; the claimants may withdraw their apportioned shares subject to adjustment for sums already withdrawn.

Source reference: p.8
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19882

Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

AMUDHAvsK.RANGANATHAN

Madras High Court · October 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment