Nangarath Abdul Rahiman vs Sudheesh M
2021 Latest Caselaw 22222 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
 FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                      MACA NO. 1475 OF 2016
    AGAINST THE AWARD IN MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
                            KASARGOD
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

    1       NANGARATH ABDUL RAHIMAN
            AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. ABDULKHADER HAJI,
            RESIDING AT N.A.HOUSE, OLAVARE,
            SOUTH TRIKARIPUR VILLAGE,
            P.O.UDUMBAMTHALA.
    2       SHAHARBAN K.
            AGED 44 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN,
            RESIDING AT N.A.HOUSE, OLAVARE,
            SOUTH TRIKARIPUR VILLAGE,
            P.O.UDUMBAMTHALA.
            BY ADVS.
            SRI.M.M.ANTO
            SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1       SUDHEESH M.
            S/O. JANARDHANAN K., AGED 43 YEARS,
            RESIDING AT KANKOKARAN HOUSE,
            NEAR THAYINERI MUCHILOTT,
            ANNUR P.O., PAYYANNUR-670307.
    2       DINOOP M.P.
            S/O. BHASKARAN, "BHASURAM", ANCHAMPEEDIKA,
            P.O.MOTTAMMAL, KANNUR DISTRICT-670331.
    3       THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
            KANNUR-670 001.
            R3 BY ADV SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN

     THIS     MOTOR   ACCIDENT   CLAIMS   APPEAL    HAVING   BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 04.10.2021, THE COURT ON 05.11.2021
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 M.A.C.A. No. 2432 of 2013
                                     2




                              T.R. RAVI, J.
               --------------------------------------------
                       M.A.C.A. No. 1475 of 2016
                --------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 5th day of November, 2021

                                 JUDGMENT

Appellants are the parents of late Mohammed Ramees who

died in a motor accident. The appellants preferred a claim before

the Tribunal claiming compensation. The deceased was aged 18

years and it was claimed that he was working as a Painter and

earning about ₹5,000/- per month at the time of the accident.

The Tribunal granted compensation of ₹5,75,000/-. Aggrieved by

the award, the appellants have preferred this appeal seeking

enhancement of the compensation.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

Sri P.G.Ganappan, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent insurer.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that

the Tribunal went wrong in adopting a notional income of ₹4,000/-

for computing the compensation under the head loss of

dependency. It is submitted that the accident happened in 2012

and there was no reason to reduce the amount of ₹5,000/-

claimed as monthly income, having regard to the dictum laid down

in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance M.A.C.A. No. 2432 of 2013

Insurance Co.Ltd., reported in [AIR 2011 SC 2951]. It is

further submitted that the Tribunal did not make any addition

towards future prospects. The learned counsel for the insurer

fairly submitted that ₹5,000/- can be adopted as the monthly

income and 40% has to be added towards future prospects, going

by the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in several

decisions. However, it is submitted that the compensation

awarded under certain other heads are not correct. It is pointed

out that a sum of ₹25,000/- has been granted towards funeral

expenses and the appellants would be entitled to only ₹15,000/-

under the said head. No amount has been awarded towards loss

of estate and the appellants will be entitled to ₹15,000/- under

that head. So also the Tribunal has awarded a sum of ₹1 lakh

towards loss of love and affection. It is submitted that the

appellants together will be entitled to a sum of ₹80,000/- towards

loss of consortium and hence ₹20,000/- has been awarded in

excess. Consolidating the amounts under the above heads, a sum

of ₹15,000/- has to be deducted from the compensation. As

regards the compensation for loss of dependency on the basis of

the monthly income of ₹5,000/- along with 40% added towards

future prospects, the appellants will be entitled to a sum of M.A.C.A. No. 2432 of 2013

₹7,56,000/- under the above head (5000x140%x12x18x1/2).

After deducting the amount of ₹4,32,000/- granted by the

Tribunal, the appellants will be entitled to a sum of ₹3,24,000/-

under the head loss of dependency.

4. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the appellants

are awarded an enhanced compensation of ₹3,09,000/-

(Rupees Three Lakhs Nine Thousand only) with interest at the

rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition

(11.10.2013) till the date of realisation, with proportionate costs.

The 3rd respondent insurer shall deposit the additional

compensation granted in this appeal along with the interest and

proportionate costs, before the Tribunal within two months from

the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after

deducting any amount to which the appellants are liable towards

balance court fee and legal benefit fund. The disbursement of the

compensation to the appellants shall be in accordance with law.

Sd/-

T.R. RAVI JUDGE

dsn