Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Kerala High Court
Nimju vs T.P.Veeran on 21 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
ST
TUESDAY, THE 21
DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
MACA NO. 926 OF 2014
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 07.05.2013 IN OP(MV) NO.860 OF 2012 OF
PRINCIPAL MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1
NIMJU M.,
AGED 22 YEARS,
W/O. LATE SATHYAN, VASU BHAVAN,
MATTUPURATH, POST FEROKE, KOZHIKODE.
2
PRASANNA,
AGED 52 YEARS,
W/O. ASOKAN, VAZHAYUR, POST AZHINHILAM, MALAPPURAM.
Y ADVS.
B
SRI.R.SUDHISH
SMT.M.MANJU
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 T.P.VEERAN, S/O. MUHAMMED, THALEKKARA PANDAYIL HOUSE, UNNIYATHIPARAMBA, VALIYAPARAMBA POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673637. 2 ASHRAF, S/O. BEERAN, VALAYAMKOTTIL HOUSE, PULPATTA POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676126. MACA 926 of 2014 2 3 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., M SONS ARCADE, 4TH FLOOR, CHEROOTTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673001. R3 BY ADV.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.), STANDING COUNSEL R3 BY ADV.P.JACOB MATHEW, STANDING COUNSEL HIS T MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA 926 of 2014 3 J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed by the claimants in OP(MV)No.860 of 2012 on the file of Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, impugning the award on the ground ofinadequacy of compensation. 2. Sri.Sathyan,thehusbandofthe1stappellantandson of the 2nd appellant, met with a road traffic accident on 25.02.2012, at 9.30 a.m., while he was riding a motorcycle through Bypass road near Bhavana bus stop. He wasknocked down by KL-10/AH-5343 lorry, driven by the 2nd respondent, in a rash and negligent manner. He sustained serious injuries and died on the same day, due to the gravity of the injuries sufferedbyhim. Hewasa28yearoldcoolie,earningmonthly income of Rs.12,000/-.HislegalheirsapproachedtheTribunal claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-, but the Tribunal awarded only Rs.6,37,000/-, and hence this appeal. 3. The 1st respondent was the owner of the offending vehicle, 2nd respondent was itsdriverandthe3rdrespondent was its Insurer. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte. The MACA 926 of 2014 4 3rd respondent-Insurer entered appearance through counsel and admitted the Policy. 4. Now this Court iscalledupontoanswerwhetherthere is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the impugned award warranting interference by this Court. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurer. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants would contendthat though the deceased was a coolie earning monthly income of Rs.12,000/-, the Tribunal fixed his notional income @ Rs.4,500/-. Learned counsel would rely upon the decision Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited [AIR 2011 SC 2951], to contend that in the year 2012, the notional income of a coolie might have been fixed @ Rs.8,500/-. Relyingonthatdecision,thisCourtisinclinedtofixhisnotional income @ Rs.8,500/- per month.Moreover,sincehewasaged below 40, he was eligible to get 40% addition towards future MACA 926 of 2014 5 prospects. Ifso,hismonthlyincomecouldhavebeenfixedas Rs.11,900/- (8,500 + 40%). Since he was having two dependents ⅓ had to be deducted towards his personal expenses. So, the balance would come to Rs.7,933/-. The multiplier applicable is 17 as he was aged only 28. So, compensationforlossofdependencycouldhavebeenassessed as Rs.16,18,332/- (7,933x12x17). The Tribunal already awarded Rs.6,12,000/- under the head 'loss of dependency'. After deducting thatamount,theappellantsareentitledtoget Rs.10,06,332/- as enhanced compensation under the head 'loss of dependency'. 7. Towards funeral expenses, learned Tribunal awarded only Rs.8,000/-. As per the decision National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others, [(2017) 16 SCC 680],theappellantsareentitledtogetRs.15,000/-. So, they are entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.7,000/- under the head 'funeral expenses'. 8. Towards loss of consortium, learned Tribunal awarded onlyRs.10,000/-.RelyingonPranaySethi'scasecitedsupra, MACA 926 of 2014 6 they are eligible to get Rs.40,000/- each, amounting to Rs.80,000/- in total. After deducting Rs.10,000/- already awarded, they are entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.70,000/-. 9. Towards loss of estate, learned Tribunal awarded only Rs.5,000/-. Based on Pranay Sethi's case cited supra, they areeligibletogetRs.15,000/-.So,theyareentitled toreceive the balance Rs.10,000/- as enhancement underthehead'loss of estate'. 10. The compensation awarded under all other heads seems to be reasonable and hence it needs no modification. Head of claim mount A mount A Difference to be awarded by awarded in drawn as the Tribunal appeal enhanced compensation oss of L Rs.6,12,000/- Rs.16,18,332/- Rs.10,06,332/- dependency Funeral expenses Rs.8,000/- Rs.15,000/- Rs.7,000/- oss of L Rs.10,000/- Rs.80,000/- Rs.70,000/- consortium Loss of estate Rs.5,000/- Rs.15,000/- Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.10,93,332/- MACA 926 of 2014 7 11. In the result, the appellants are entitled to get Rs.10,93,332/-(10,06,332 + 7,000 + 70,000 + 10,000) as enhanced compensation. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants wouldsubmitthat the 1st appellant, who was the wife of the deceased, is remarried. Even then, she is eligible to get compensation on the death of her husband. Learned Tribunal apportioned the compensation between the claimants in the ratio2:4.Learned counsel for the appellants expressed no objection in retaining that ratio with respect to the enhanced compensation also. 13. Hence, the 3rd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposittheenhancedcompensationofRs.10,93,332/-(Rupees TenLakhNinetyThreeThousandThreeHundredandThirtyTwo only)with8%interestperannum,fromthedateofpetitiontill the date of deposit (excluding 76 days of delay in filing the appeal) before the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode, with in a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Learned Tribunal shall disbursethecompensationamounttoappellants1and2inthe MACA 926 of 2014 8 ratio2:4,afterdeductingtheliabilities,ifany,oftheappellants towards tax, balance court fee, legal benefit funds etc. The appeal is allowed to the extent as above, and no order is made as to costs. Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE DSV/-