The Madras High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd., confirming the award of ₹2,92,69,944 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thiruvallur, to the family of an ISRO Scientist who died in a road accident.

The deceased was riding a two wheeler on the Minjur–Vandalur Bypass Outer Ring Road on December 31, 2019, when he hit a TATA Ace vehicle that was parked on the left side of the road without any indication. He sustained grievous injuries on his head and other parts of the body and died on the spot.

A Division Bench comprising Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice K. Rajasekar upheld the Tribunal's finding that the accident occurred solely due to the negligent parking of a TATA Ace vehicle on the Outer Ring Road. It held, "We are of the view that the parking of TATA Ace vehicle was the root cause for the accident. Though it is alleged that the deceased might have come at high speed, that could not be considered as a negligent act, since the parking place was a crucial point, triggering the accident. Therefore, fixing up of contributory negligence on the deceased would not be proper and we agree with the case of the claimants that the accident had occurred solely due to the negligent parking of TATA Ace vehicle on the track, which was specifically meant for two wheelers."

Advocate Vinod K appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate C.K. Chandrasekkar appeared for the Respondents.

His wife, minor son and mother filed a claim petition seeking compensation, stating that the deceased was a Scientist in ISRO, working at Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, and earning ₹2,05,574 per month.

The insurer challenged the Tribunal's award, contending that the deceased was responsible for the accident as he rode the two wheeler at high speed and dashed against the stationed vehicle from behind. It also argued that contributory negligence ought to have been fixed on the deceased.

The claimants, however, maintained that the TATA Ace vehicle had been parked on the Outer Ring Road, which was meant for fast travel, at the entry point of an elevated corridor where visibility was limited due to the slopy bridge. They argued that the vehicle was parked on the track usually used by two wheelers.

After examining the evidence of the eye witness and the driver of the TATA Ace vehicle, along with the Motor Vehicle Inspection Report, photographs and the First Information Report, the Bench found that the goods vehicle had been parked dangerously in the two wheeler track.

The Court observed that the place of occurrence was an entry point of the elevated road and that vehicles entering the elevated corridor could not easily see the parked vehicle. It held that the visibility was not sufficient for vehicles entering the elevated corridor from the regular road.

Rejecting the insurer's contention that the deceased should have driven at a lesser speed, the Bench said the accident spot was meant for travel at high speed and that vehicles entering the Ring Road normally travelled fast.

"It is true that any vehicle coming with lesser speed can avoid accidents. However, the place, where the accident occurred, was meant for travel at high speed," the Court observed.

The Bench further noted that the police had investigated the occurrence and filed a final report against the driver of the TATA Ace vehicle, with no rebuttal to the criminal proceedings.

Holding that "the parking of TATA Ace vehicle was the root cause for the accident," the Court ruled that the speed of the deceased could not be treated as a negligent act and that fixing contributory negligence on him would not be proper.

Accordingly, the High Court confirmed the Tribunal's finding on negligence as well as the compensation awarded, noting that there was no challenge to the quantum.

Cause Title: Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. P.Ammu & Ors., [2026:MHC:2304]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate Vinod K

Respondents: Advocates C.K.Chandrasekkar, R.Prabu

Click here to read/download Order


Tags: