CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page1 of 16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH CMA No. 4246 of 2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228 of 2021 and CMP Nos. 6194, 6203 & 6210 of 2021 1. Manjula, W/o. Paulraj 2. Minor. Vibinu, Rep. by Natural Guardian and Mother Manjula, 3. Minor. Ramprasad Rep. by Natural Guardian and Mother Manjula, No.2/310, MGR Nagar, D.S.P.Nagar, T.Manarai, Tirupur Taluk and District. All are residing at No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode District. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Chellamani S/o. Ramasamy No.376, N.No.360, Tagore Nagar, Thirupalai, Madurai Taluk and District. 2. United India Ins. Co. Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Having its Registered Office at No.139, CG Complex, III Floor, Kumaran Road, Coimbatore – 641 601. 3. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madurai, Rep by its General Manager, Having Registered Office at Bye Pass Road, Madurai. 4. Kathiresan, S/o. Balagurusamy, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page2 of 16 Akkaraipatti, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District. 5. V.S. Murugan S/o. Sankaralingam, No.1/1053e/power line 2nd Street, Nerupperichal, Tiruppur. 6. Royal Sundaram Alliance Ins.Co.Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Having its Registered Office At Sundaram Towers, No.46, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai. 7. Viji M/o. Late. Paulraj, No.2/310, MGR Nagar, D.S.P.Nagar, T.Manarai, Tirupur Taluk and District. 8. Minor. Vidhya D/o. Late. Paulraj, Rep. by Guardian Mother Viji, No.2/310, MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T. Manarai, Tirupur Taluk and District. 9. Chandran S/o. Soundarajan, No.2/310, MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T. Manarai, Tirupur Taluk and District. ..Respondent(s) CMA No. 1228 of 2021 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co Ltd Rep. by its Manager, Having its Regd, Office At Sundaram Towers, No.46, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai - 600014. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Manjula W/o.Late Paulraj, Resi At No.2/310 Mgr Nagar, DSP Nagar, T Mannarai, Tiruppur Taluk and District, Presently Resi at No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page3 of 16 2. Vibinu (minor) D/o.Late Paulraj, Resi At No.2/310 MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T Mannarai, Tiruppur Taluk and District, Presently Res At No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode District. (respondents 2 And 3 Minors Rep. By Mother And NF 1st Respondent) 3. Ramprasad (minor) S/o.Late Paulraj, Resi At No.2/310 MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T Mannarai, Tiruppur Taluk And District, Presently Resi At No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode District. (respondents 2 And 3 Minors Rept By Mother And NF 1st Respondent) 4. Viji W/o.Chandran And M/o.Late Paulraj, Respondents 4 To 6 are Resi At No.2/310, MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 5. Vidhya (minor) S/o Late Paulraj, Respondents 4 to 6 are Resi At No.2/310, MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 5th Respondent Minor Rept by Mother And NF 4th Respondent) 6. Chandran S/o.Soundarajan, Respondents 4 To 6 Are Resi At No.2/310, MGR Nagar, DSP Nagar, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 7. Chellamani S/o.Ramasamy, Old No.376, New No.360 Tagore Nagar, Thirupalai, Madurai Tk And District. 8. M/s.United India Insurance Co Ltd Rep. By Its Manager, Having Its Registered Office At 139, C G Complex, III Floor, Kumaran Road, Coimbatore 641601. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page4 of 16 9. TNSTC Madurai Rept By Its General Manager, Having Regd Office At Bye Pass Road, Madurai. 10.Kathiresan S/o.Balagurusamy, Akkaraipatti, Periyur Taluk, Madurai District. 11.V.S.Murugan S/o.Sankaralingam, No.1/1053-e, Power line, 2nd Street, Neruperichal, Tirupur 641602. 12.V.Mahalakshmi W/o.Late S.Venkatesan, Both Are Resi At D No.2/323, DSP Nagar, MGR Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 13.V.Ramakrishnan (minor) S/o.Late S.Venkatesan, Both Are Resi At D No.2/323, DSP Nagar, MGR Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 13th Respondent Minor Rept By Mother And NF 12th Respondent. ..Respondent(s) CMA No. 1224 of 2021 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd, Rep By Its Manager, Having its Regd Office At Sundaram Towers, No.46, Whites Road, Royepettah, Chennai-600 014. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. Viji W/o. Chandran, No.2/310, M.G.R. Nagar, D.S.P.Nagar, T.Manarai, Tiruppur Taluk And District. Presently Residing At No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpalayam, Erode District. 2. Chellamani, S/o. Ramasamy, Old No.376, New No.360, Tagore Nagar, Thirupalai, Madurai Taluk And District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page5 of 16 3. M/s.United India Insurance Company Ltd, Rep By Its Manager, Having Its Registered Office At, 139, C.G.Complex, III Floor, Kumaran Road, Coimbatore-641 601. 4. TNSTC Madurai, Rep By Its General Manager, Having Regd Office At Bye Pass Road, Madurai District. 5. Kathiresan S/o. Balagurusamy, Akkaraipatti, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District. 6. V.S.Murugan S/o. Sankaralingam, No.1/1053-e, Powerline, 2nd Street, Neruperichal, Tirupur-641 602. 7. V. Mahalakshmi W/o. Late S.Venkatesan, D.No.2/323, D.S.P.Nagar, M.G.R.Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 8. V. Ramakrishnan (minor) S/o. Late S. Venkatesan, D.No.2/323, D.S.P.Nagar, M.G.R.Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. ..Respondent(s) CMA No. 1221 of 2021 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Manager, Having Its Regd. Office At Sundaram Towers, No.46, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. N.Veeranagalakshmi W/o.Nagamuthu, and Daughter of Ranganayagi, Old No.31, New No.31, Valavikara Street, Periyakulam 625 601, Theni District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page6 of 16 2. V.Meena W/o.Velusamy, And Daughter of Ranganayagi, Old No.7, New No.31, Sudhanthira Street, Periyakulam 625 601, Theni District. 3. K.Muthuraj S/o.Krishnasamy, No.7/215, T.V.Renganathapuram, Rajagopalanpatti 625 512 Theni District. Presently Residing At No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpayalam, Erode District. 4. K.Murugan S/o.Krishnasamy, No.7/215, T.V.Renganathapuram, Rajagopalanpatti 625 512 Theni District. Presently Residing At No.181, Kaveri Road, Karungalpayalam, Erode District. 5. Chellamani S/o.Ramasamy, Old No.376, New No.360, Tagore Nagar, Thirupalai, Madurai Taluk And District. 6. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Having its Registered Office At, 139, C.G.Complex, III Floor, Kumaran Road, Coimbatore 641 601. 7. TNSTC Madurai Rep. by Its General Manager, Having Reg. Office At Bye-pass Road, Madurai. 8. Kathiresan S/o.Balagurusamy, Akkaraipatti, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District. 9. V.S.Murugan S/o.Sankaralingam, No.1/1053-e, Powerline, 2nd Street, Neruperichal, Tirupur 641 602. 10.Krishnasamy, T.V.Renganathapuram, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page7 of 16 Rajagopalanpatti 625 512, Theni District. 11.V.Mahalakshmi W/o.Late S.Venkatesan, Door No.2/323, D.S.P. Nagar, M.G.R.Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. 12.V.Ramakrishnan(minor) S/o.Late S.Venkatesan, (12th Respondent Minor Rep. By Mother And Next Friend 11th Respondent)door No.2/323, D.S.P. Nagar, M.G.R.Colony, T.Mannarai, Tiruppur. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER in CMA No.4246/2019: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, to prefer this Memorandum of Grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the Judgment and Award of the MACT (Special District Court) Erode in MCOP No.609 of 2014 dated 16.09.2016. PRAYER in CMA No.1228/2021: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, to against the Judgment and Decree in MCOP No.609 of 2014 dated 16.09.2016, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode. PRAYER in CMA No.1224/2021: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, to against the Judgment and Decree in MCOP.No.610 of 2014, dated 16.09.2016, on the file file the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode. PRAYER in CMA No.1221/2021: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, to against the judgment and decree in MCOP.No.614 of 2014, dated 16.09.2016, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Special District Court, Erode. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page8 of 16 For Appellant(s): Mr.R.P.Ruban Chakravarthy For M/s.S. Kaithamalai Kumaran in CMA 4246/2019 Ms.C.Harini, For M/s.M.B.Gopalan Associates in CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 For Respondent(s): Mr.R.P.Ruban Chakravarthy For M/s.S. Kaithamalai Kumaran For R1 to R6 in CMA No.1228/2021 For R1 in CMA No.1224/2021 For R1 to R4 in CMA No.1221/2021 Mr.S.Santhosa Kumar, Standing Counsel for TNSTC For R3 in CMA No.4246/2019 For R3 in CMA No.1221/2021 For R4 in CMA No.1224/2021 For R9 in CMA No.1228/2021 COMMON JUDGMENT All these appeals arise out of the common award passed by the Special District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Erode in M.C.O.P.Nos. 609, 610 and 614 of 2014 dated 16.09.2016, wherein the Insurance Company in three appeals has questioned the 25% liability attributed against them, and the claimants in C.M.A.No.4246 of 2019 are seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. The case of the claimants is that on 13.07.2014, the deceased in each case was travelling to attend a family function in a TATA Sumo car on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page9 of 16 Dharapuram – Ottanchathiram road and at about 16.10 hours the driver-cum- owner of the vehicle, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, and overtook the vehicle in front of the TATA Sumo car and dashed on a bus belonging to the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. Due to the impact, six occupants of the car died on the spot. Out of the same, three claim petitions were filed in M.C.O.P.Nos.609, 610 and 614 of 2014. 3. The Tribunal, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that 50% negligence is attributable to the driver of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation, 25% negligence is attributable to the driver of the TATA Sumo car, and the balance 25% negligence is attributable to the driver of the Maruthi Suzuki car. 4. The Tribunal, having rendered the above finding, fixed the compensation in M.C.O.P.No.609 of 2014 as follows: Sl. No. Compensation awarded under the head Amount (in Rs.) 1. For Loss of Consortium Rs.1,00,000/- 2. For Funeral Expenditure Rs.25,000/- 3. For Transportation Rs.10,000/- 4. For Loss of Love and Affection Rs.40,000/- 5. For the Loss of income Rs.15,79,392/- Total Rs.17,54,392/- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page10 of 16 5. In M.C.O.P.No.610 of 2014, the Tribunal fixed the compensation as follows: Sl. No. Compensation awarded under the head Amount (in Rs.) 1. For Funeral Expenditure Rs.25,000/- 2. For Transportation Rs.10,000/- 3. For Loss of Love and Affection Rs.10,000/- 4. For loss of dependency Rs.51,996/- Total Rs.96,996/- 6. In M.C.O.P.No.614 of 2014, the Tribunal fixed the compensation as follows: Sl. No. Compensation awarded under the head Amount (in Rs.) 1. For Funeral Expenditure Rs.25,000/- 2. For Transportation Rs.10,000/- 3. For Loss of Love and Affection Rs.40,000/- 4. For loss of income Rs.58,500/- Total Rs.1,33,500/- 7. The above compensation was directed to be paid with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 8. C.M.A.Nos.1221, 1224 and 1228 of 2021 has been filed by the Insurance Company questioning attributing 25% negligence on the Maruthi Suzuki car. The claimants in M.C.O.P.No.609 of 2014 have filed C.M.A.No.4246 of 2019 seeking for enhancement of compensation. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page11 of 16 9. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and respondents in all the appeals. 10. This Court carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record. This Court carefully went through the award passed by the Tribunal. 11. In the case in hand, the Tribunal, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, has rendered a categorical finding that the Maruthi Suzuki car was proceeding from East to West and the Tata Sumo car was coming behind the Maruthi Suzuki car in the same direction, and the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation was coming in the opposite direction from West to East. The Tribunal, at paragraph 55 of the award, has also categorically held that if the driver-cum-owner of the Tata Sumo car had avoided overtaking the Maruthi Suzuki car till the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation had passed the said two cars, the entire accident could have been averted. Thus, what becomes evident is that the Tata Sumo car was coming behind the Maruthi Suzuki car, and the driver-cum-owner of the Tata Sumo car had overtaken the Maruthi Suzuki car, and there was a head on collision with the bus belonging to the State Transport Corporation, as a result of which six precious lives were lost. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page12 of 16 12. On assessment of the evidence, the above findings rendered by the Tribunal does not in any way establish any negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi Suzuki car. However, curiously, the Tribunal relies upon Rule 23 of the Road Regulations, which deals with the distance that has to be maintained by a vehicle from the vehicle that is going in front. The Tribunal holds that the Maruthi Suzuki car did not maintain the safe distance behind the Tata Sumo car and therefore 25% negligence is attributable to the driver of the Maruthi Suzuki car. The above finding rendered by the Tribunal is baseless and it completely contradicts the manner in which the accident had taken place, and which was rightly described by the Tribunal on appreciation of evidence. Admittedly, in this case, the Maruthi Suzuki car was not coming behind the Tata Sumo car, and it is only the Tata Sumo car which was coming behind the Maruthi Suzuki car and the driver of the Tata Sumo car, overtook the Maruthi Suzuki car and collided head-on, on the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation. 13. The upshot of the above discussion leads to the only conclusion that there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the Maruthi Suzuki car and the finding of the Tribunal attributing 25% contributory negligence on the driver of the Maruthi Suzuki car is hereby set aside. This Court is inclined to fix 50% negligence on the owner-cum-driver of the Tata Sumo car and sustain 50% negligence that has already been fixed against the driver of the bus belonging to the State Transport Corporation. The compensation shall be payable by the State https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page13 of 16 Transport Corporation and the insurer of the Tata Sumo car, namely the United India Insurance Company Limited, in the proportion of 50% : 50%. 14. Insofar the appeal filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation is concerned, it is seen that the deceased had left behind his wife, two minor sons and mother. The age of the deceased is 25 years at the time of the accident. The Tribunal has fixed the notional monthly income at Rs.6,500/- and calculated the compensation under the head of loss of income. The accident had taken place in the year 2014, and there are four claimants in this case. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to fix the notional monthly income at Rs.11,000/- per month. Accordingly, the compensation under the head of loss of income is calculated as follows: Monthly income : Rs.11,000/- Add Future Prospects @ 50% : Rs.5,500/- Total Monthly income (11,000 + 5,500) : Rs.16,500/- Deducted 1/4 towards personal expenses :Rs.4,125/- (16,500 / 4) Monthly contribution (16,500 – 4,125) : Rs.12,375/- Annual income (12,375 x 12) : Rs.1,48,500/- Multiplier at ‘18’ (1,48,500 x 18) : Rs.26,73,000/- 15. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of loss of consortium and Rs.40,000/- under the head of loss of love and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page14 of 16 affection. This Court is inclined to consolidate both the heads and grant compensation of a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- under the head of loss of consortium (4 x Rs.40,000/-). 16. The Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation under the head of funeral expenses and the same is reduced to Rs.15,000/-. This Court is inclined to grant compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head of loss of estate. 17. In the light of the above discussion, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified as follows: Sl. No. Compensation awarded under the head Amount awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.) Amount awarded by this Court (in Rs.) 1. For Loss of Consortium Rs.1,00,000/- Rs.1,60,000/- 2. For Funeral Expenditure Rs.25,000/- Rs.15,000/- 3. For Transportation Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/- 4. For Loss of Love and Affection Rs.40,000/- Nil 5. For the Loss of income Rs.15,79,392/- Rs.26,73,000/- Total Rs.17,54,392/- Rs.28,58,000/- 18. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.17,54,392/- is enhanced to Rs.28,58,000/-. The compensation shall be payable by the transport corporation and the second respondent Insurance Company in the proportion of 50% : 50%, less the amount already deposited, together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit within https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page15 of 16 a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the same on due application as apportioned by the Tribunal. Insofar as the enhanced compensation is concerned, the deficit court fee, if not paid, shall be paid by the appellants. The other directions issued by the Tribunal with regard to the mode of payment of compensation remains unaltered. 19. In the result, C.M.A.Nos.1228, 1221, 1224 of 2021 is allowed and C.M.A.No.4246 of 2019 is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 21-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSI To: 1. The Special District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Erode. 2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMA No.4246/2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228/2021 __________ Page16 of 16 N.ANAND VENKATESH J. SSI CMA No. 4246 of 2019 and CMA Nos.1221, 1224 & 1228 of 2021 and CMP Nos.6194, 6203 & 6210 of 2021 21-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis