Kerala High Court
Gopalakrishnan vs The National Insurance Company ... on 14 July, 2021
M.A.C.A No.1928/2017 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 23RD ASHADHA,
1943
MACA NO. 1928 OF 2017
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 3.6.2015 IN OPMV 1132/2012 OF
MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD
APPELLANTS:PETITIONERS
1 GOPALAKRISHNAN M V,
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. PARANGODAN, THOTTATHIL VEEDU, KONGADU
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, KERALA - 678 631, NOW RESIDING
AT 261/3, S.K.NAGAR, B.K.PUTHUR,KUNIYANPUTHUR,
COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU - 641 008.
2 DHANYA. G, AGED 30 YEARS
D/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS, THOTTATHIL
VEEDU, KONGADU PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
KERALA - 678 631, NOW RESIDING AT
261/3, S.K. NAGAR, B.K.PUTHUR, KUNIYANPUTHUR,
COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU - 641 008.
3 DIVYA. G, AGED 27 YEARS
D/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN. M.V., AGED 27 YEARS,
THOTTATHIL VEEDU,KONGADU PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
KERALA - 678 631, NOW RESIDING AT 261/3,
S.K. NAGAR, B.K.PUTHUR, KUNIYANPUTHUR,
COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU - 641 008.
BY ADVS.
SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
SMT.K.J.ANITHA
RESPONDENT : 3RD RESPONDENT
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
KOLLANNUR DEVASSY SMARK BUILDING,
ROUND EAST, THRISSUR - 678 631.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
SMT.K.S.SANTHI
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 01.07.2021, THE COURT ON 14.07.2021 DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A No.1928/2017 2
A.BADHARUDEEN, J.
----------------------------------------
M.A.C.A No.1928 of 2017
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of July, 2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioners, who are the husband and two daughters respec-
tively of the deceased, seek enhancement of compensation granted by
the M.A.C.T, Palakkad as per award dated 3.6.2015 in O.P(MV)
No.1132/2012. The respondents before the Tribunal are arrayed as the
respondents herein.
2. The short facts of the case:
The claim for compensation is made by the husband and two
adult daughters of forty eight years old Kunjulakshmi, who died in a
motor accident that occurred on 19.4.2011 at 6.50 a.m. The bus in
which she was travelling went out of the control of its driver and cap-
sized at Thottupalam on Kongad-Pathiripala road. She suffered fatal
injuries in the accident and succumbed to them on 26.4.2012 while un-
dergoing treatment in a hospital. Alleging rashness and negligence of
the bus driver, the petitioners have preferred this claim for compensa-
tion against him, the owner and insurer of the vehicle.
3. As against the claim of Rs14,00,000/-, the Tribunal, by the
impugned award, directed payment of a total amount of Rs.9,06,000/-
with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition as per the de-
tails annexed with the impugned award, which I extract below:
Sl. Head of claim Amount awarded
No.
1 Medical expenses Rs. 90,000.00
2 Loss of love and affection Rs. 10,000.00
3 Loss of consortium Rs. 1,00,000.00
4 Loss of estate Rs. 5,000.00
Loss of dependency/economic benefits Rs. 6,76,000.00
5 (52000 X 13)
6 Funeral expenses Rs. 25,000.00
Total Rs. 9,06,000.00
4. While canvassing enhancement, the learned counsel for
the appellants/petitioners submitted that the Tribunal failed to add 25%
of the income while assessing loss of dependency as held in National
Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Ors. [(2017) 16
SCC 680]. This is a case where the deceased was aged 48 years at the
time of accident. Going by the ratio of Pranay Sethi's case (supra)
this submission appears to be correct. Therefore, the learned counsel
for the 3rd respondent also not disputed the legal position. In view of
the submission, the amount considered for assessing loss of dependen-
cy income would be : Rs.6500/- plus 6500/4 = Rs.8125/-. No other
challenge is raised regarding multiplier or the deduction made towards
the personal expenses. Therefore, the loss of dependency income is
calculated as : Rs.(8125 minus 8125/3) X 12 X13 = Rs.9,27,732/-.
5. Another challenge raised is that the petitioners are entitled
to get loss of consortium @ Rs.40,000/- each following the ratio of
Pranay Sethi's case (supra). However, the Tribunal granted only Rs.1
lakh. The said submission also is correct in view of the legal proposi-
tion settled in Pranay Sethi's case (supra). Therefore, the petitioners
are entitled to get Rs.1,20,000/- under this head. Out of which Rs.1
lakh was granted by the court below and the remaining Rs.20,000/- is
entitled to be granted. The learned counsel for the insurance compa-
ny submitted that Rs.25,000/- was granted under the head funeral ex-
penses and as per Pranay Sethi's case (supra), the said amount should
be Rs.15,000/-. So Rs.10,000/- shall be reduced under the head fu-
neral expenses. This contention is conceded by the learned counsel
for the appellants/petitioners. Therefore, I am inclined to confine the
amount under funeral expenses to Rs.15,000/-.
6. Similarly the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that only Rs.5,000/- is granted under the head loss of estate. I enhance
the same to Rs.15,000/-. No dispute is raised as against the multiplier.
In fact the multiplier applied by the Tribunal was based on Sarla Ver-
ma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC 121] and the same
is correct.
7. Therefore, the award is modified and enhancement grant-
ed as follows:
Sl. Head of claim Amount awarded Modified award
No. amount1
1 Medical expenses Rs. 90,000.00 Rs. 90,000.00
2 Loss of love and affection Rs. 10,000.00 Rs. 10,000.00
3 Loss of consortium Rs. 1,00,000.00 Rs. 1,20,000.00
4 Loss of estate Rs. 5,000.00 Rs. 15,000.00
Loss of dependency/economic Rs. 6,76,000.00 Rs. 9,27,732.00
5 benefits (52000 X 13)
6 Funeral expenses Rs. 25,000.00 Rs. 15,000.00
Total Rs. 9,06,000.00 Rs. 11,77,732.00
8. In the result:
a) This M.A.C.A is allowed;
b) The appellants/petitioners are found entitled to a further
amount of Rs.2,71,732/- (Rupees Two lakh seventy one thousand
seven hundred and thirty two only) in addition to the amount already
awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned award;
c) The entire amount of compensation shall carry interest at
the rate 9% from the date of petition till the date of deposit or
realisation. But it is made clear that no interest amount on the
enhanced amount of compensation will be payable for the period of
delay in filing this appeal, ie. 508 days, as delay was condoned at the
time of admission on such a condition;
d) The 3rd respondent/insurer is directed deposit the entire
amount of compensation within a period of two months from this date.
e) All other directions of the Tribunal are upheld.
Sd/-
(A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE)
rtr/
