Kerala High Court
Vottu Raja vs Abraham @ Regi on 8 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1944
MACA NO. 1800 OF 2012
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(M.V) 531/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
VOTTU RAJA, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.NAGA THEVAR,
THUKKAYAMMAN KOVILINU, SAMEEPAM THAMASOM,
WARD NO.1, DOOR NO.52 C, MAMBAM MUNICIPALITY,
UTHAMAPURAM, KOMBAI ROAD, THENI DISTRICT,
TAMIL NADU, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT
ADIMACKAL HOUSE, VELLIYEPPALLY KARA,
MEENACHIL VILLAGE, PALA, KOTTAYAM.
BY ADV. SRI.SHIJU VARGHEESE
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 ABRAHAM @ REGI, S/O.PHILIPOSE,
CHERUVAZHAKUNNEL HOUSE, VAKKAPUZHA KARA BHAGOM,
VAKKAPUZHA KARA, CHETHAKKAL VILLAGE, PALA,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 575.
2 SHAJI B.NAIR,
S/O.BALACHANDRAN NAIR K.S., KIZHAKKEVAYALIL
HOUSE, EDAMATTOM, PALA,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 575.
3 THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
REP. BY THE BRANCH MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDING, PALA,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 575.
4 RENJITH, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR,
KARUKAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHERUVALLY VILLAGE,
KANJIRAPPALY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 507.
5 MALANADU MOTOR SALES AND SERVICE PRIVATE LTD.,
CHELLARKKADU KARA,
PADAVANGADY VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 672.
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
2
BY ADVS.
BABY THOMAS
SRI.LAL GEORGE
K.ANIL JOSEPH
GEORGE T.J
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING FINALLY
HEARD ON 08.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is at the instance of the
claimant in O.P.(M.V) No.531/2008 on the file
of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala and
the award dated 15.05.2012 in the above case is
under challenge in this appeal. Respondents
herein are the respondents before the Tribunal.
2. Heard both sides.
3. The appellant herein being a victim of
motor accident had approached the Tribunal and
claimed compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- from the
respondents, attributing negligence against 1 st
respondent, the driver of the vehicle bearing
registration No.KL-5/11-2925.
4. The Insurance Company filed written
statement and resisted the claim, while
admitting policy.
5. The Tribunal examined PWs.1 and 2 and
marked Exts.A1 to A11 on the side of the
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
appellant. Exts.B1 to B4 marked on the side of
the respondents.
6. Thereafter, as against the claim of
Rs.2,50,000/-, Rs.62,529/- awarded as
compensation along with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum. Recovery right was given to the
Insurance Company on finding that the 1 st
respondent had no driving license at the time
of accident.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant
highlighted inadequacy of the award on two
specific grounds. According to him, though the
appellant claimed his income at Rs.5,000/- per
month, being a coolie worker, the Tribunal
fixed Rs.3,000/- and the same is on the lower
side.
8. Applying the ratio in Ramachandrappa v.
Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance
Company Ltd. : (2011) 13 SCC 236, the monthly
income claimed by the appellant at Rs.5,000/-
is reasonable and, therefore, I re-fix the
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
monthly income at Rs.5,000/- for the purpose of
reassessing the compensation.
9. According to the learned counsel for
the appellant, the appellant sustained
fracture both bones right leg and he was
subjected to internal fixation and removal
thereof. Though the appellant produced Ext.A9
disability certificate before the Tribunal
fixing 14% disability, the Tribunal fixed the
same at 6%. According to the learned counsel
for the appellant at least 10% disability ought
to be fixed.
10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company would submit that there is no
mal-union in this matter and the disability
certificate is not issued by the Medical Board
and the doctor, who authored Ext.A9 also was
not examined. In such scenario, the Tribunal
rightly fixed the disability at 6% and no more
increase is warranted.
11. While appraising the rival submissions,
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
I have perused Ext.A7, the discharge card.
Ext.A7 would go to show that the appellant
sustained open fracture both bones right leg,
and he underwent treatment by internal fixation
could be gathered. Therefore, I am inclined to
fix the disability at 9% instead of 6% fixed by
the Tribunal. The age and multiplier applied by
the Tribunal are not in dispute.
12. The Tribunal granted Rs.3,000/- under
the head 'loss of earnings' for one month
alone. I am inclined to grant Rs.5,000/- as
'loss of earnings' for a period of three
months. Thus, the appellant is entitled to get
Rs.15,000/-. Accordingly, Rs.12,000/- more is
granted under the head 'loss of earnings'.
13. Apart from that, taking monthly income
@ Rs.5,000/-, the disability income also
recalculated as under:
5000x12x16x9% = 86,400/-
Out of which, Rs.34,560/- was granted by
the Tribunal. Thus, Rs.51,840/- more is granted
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
under the head 'loss of disability income'.
14. Under the head 'pain and sufferings',
the Tribunal granted Rs.10,000/- alone. I am
inclined to increase the same by Rs.7,000/-
more.
15. In the result, this appeal is allowed.
It is held that the appellant is entitled to
get Rs.1,33,360/- as compensation, out of which
Rs.62,520/- was granted by the Tribunal and the
balance amount of Rs.70,840/- is granted as
enhanced compensation with the same rate of
interest awarded by the Tribunal, payable by
the Insurance Company, from the date of
petition till the date of deposit or
realisation, excluding the period from
16.08.2012 to 15.11.2021, which was excluded by
this Court in the matter of interest as per
order dated 15.11.2021, while condoning the
delay in filing this appeal.
16. As per the award amount, the learned
Tribunal granted recovery right to the
M.A.C.A No.1800 of 2012
Insurance Company from the 1 st respondent, on
finding violation of policy conditions for want
of driving licence to the driver of the
offending vehicle. Therefore, it is
specifically ordered that the Insurance Company
can realise the entire award amount including
the enhanced compensation along with interest
from the 1strespondent, the insurer, immediately
on deposit of the same before the Tribunal.
The Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the same in the name of the appellant
within two months from today and proceed to
recover the same thereafter, as directed above.
Sd/-
A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE.
ww
