Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Reliance General Insurance ... vs Reliance General Insurance ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5225 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5225 Ker
Judgement Date : 12 February, 2021

Kerala High Court
Reliance General Insurance ... vs Reliance General Insurance ... on 12 February, 2021
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

     FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 23RD MAGHA,1942

                       MACA.No.1558 OF 2019(F)

 APPEAL AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(MV) 447/2016 DATED 18-12-2018 OF
         MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , IRINJALAKUDA


APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:

               RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
               POOTHOLE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL
               OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
               SMT.K.S.SANTHI

RESPONDENTS:

      1        RAMLAL,
               AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.SANKARAN KUTTY, AYIRATTU HOUSE,
               EDAVILANGU DESOM, VILLAGE AND P.O., KODUNGALLUR
               TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 671.

      2        SHEELA,
               AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.RAMLAL, AYIRATTU HOUSE, EDAVILANGU
               DESOM, VILLAGE AND P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR
               DISTRICT - 680 671.

      3        REDHULAL,
               AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.RAMLAL, AYIRATTU HOUSE, EDAVILANGU
               DESOM, VILLAGE AND P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR
               DISTRICT - 680 671.

               R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM

     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
12.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 MACA.No.1558 OF 2019

                                           2




                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of February 2021

This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company,

challenging the award dated 18.12.2018 in O.P.(MV) No.447/2016 on the file

of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. A young man, named,

Sri.Sidhulal, aged 24 years met with an accident on 07.02.2016, when the

motor bike in which he was travelling, was hit by a stage carriage vehicle

which had been insured with the appellant. Sri.Sidhulal succumbed to the

injury on 08.02.2016. The legal representatives, who are the parents of the

deceased and his brother, filed O.P.(MV) No.447/2016 claiming a

compensation of Rs.40,00,000/-. The Tribunal, by order dated 18.12.2018,

granted compensation of a sum of Rs. 20,58,100/-. Aggrieved by the order

of the Tribunal the Insurance Company has come up in appeal.

2. Heard Sri.George Cherian, Senior Advocate instructed by

Smt. K.S.Santhi, Advocate, on behalf of the appellant and Sri. V. Binoy Ram

on behalf of the respondents.

3. The only contention that has been raised by the counsel for

the appellant is that the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards the loss of

dependency is highly excessive.

4. I have considered the contentions of the Senior Advocate MACA.No.1558 OF 2019

and having gone through the evidence on record before the Tribunal, I am

not in a position to accept the contentions of the Senior Counsel. The

claimants had put forward a contention that the deceased was earning

Rs.30,000/- per month and that he was having Diploma in Mechanical

Engineering and had also obtained trade certificate in mechanical servicing

from the State Board of Vocational Higher Secondary Examinations. In the

absence of documentary evidence regarding income, the Tribunal found that

the income of the deceased at the time of his death can be fixed at

Rs.13,000/- per month and having regard to the fact that he was less than

40 years of age at the time of death, a 40% increase in the monthly income

can be granted. It was on this basis that an amount of Rs.19,66,000/- was

awarded under the head loss of dependency.

I am of the opinion that the method adopted by the Tribunal

cannot be faulted in any manner. No other grounds have been made out

warranting an interference by this Court with the award passed by the

Tribunal. The appeal fails and is dismissed. In the circumstances there will

be no order as to costs.

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

SMF

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter