The New India Assurance Company ... vs Ponnamma
2022 Latest Caselaw 6850 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
 TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                    MACA NO. 1779 OF 2012
  AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 674/2009 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT
                     CLAIMS TRIBUNAL PALA
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3:

         THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KOTTAYAM.

         BY ADV. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH



RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:

    1    PONNAMMA, W/O.THANKAPPAN,
         KUMARANKODU-PUTHENVEEDU, CEYLON KAVALA BHAGAM,
         VADAYAR VILLAGE, THALAYOLAPARAMBU KARA,
         NOW RESIDING AT THOLATHIL HOUSE, POOVARANY P.O.,
         MEENACHIL TALUK, PIN-686 577.

   *2    BABU @ KUNJUMON, S/O.MUHAMMED,
         BENZHAD MANZIL, KUZHIKANDATHIL,
         THALAYOLAPARAMBU KARA,
         VADAYAR VILLAGE, PIN-686 577.               *(DELETED)

         *RESPONDENT NO.2 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY
         AT THE RISK OF THE APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED
         26.10.2021 IN I.A.NO.1/2021 IN MACA 1779/2012.

    3    OSWIN KALATHIL,
         KALATHIL HOUSE, POWER HOUSE ROAD,
         ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.



THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING FINALLY HEARD ON
14.06.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 M.A.C.A No.1779 of 2012

                                2




                            JUDGMENT

This appeal arises out of award dated

08.03.2012 in O.P.(M.V.) No.674/2009 on the

file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pala.

2. The appellant is the Insurance Company,

the 3rd respondent in the above original

petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the

appellant, since none of the respondents

appeared even on notice.

4. In this matter, the learned counsel for

the Insurance Company would submit that the

multiplier applied by the Tribunal while fixing

the disability income as '11' is wrong and the

same would be only '9' following the table in

Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation :

(2009) 6 SCC 121.

5. Though the argument advanced by the

learned counsel for the appellant appears to be M.A.C.A No.1779 of 2012

convincing in accordance with the table

provided in Sarla Verma's case, it would appear

that the calculation of 22% permanent

disability was made at Rs.4,000/- per month.

6. Since the accident is of the year 2009,

if the monthly income fixed by the decision in

Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram

Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. : (2011) 13 SCC

236, is applied, the total award amount shall

not be less than the award passed by the

Tribunal. This pertinent aspect is conceded by

the learned counsel for the appellant as well.

Therefore, I am of the view that the appeal

deserves no merits, since reduction in the

impugned award is not possible.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE.

ww M.A.C.A No.1779 of 2012

APPENDIX

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED COPY OF PETITION NO.I.A.596/2012 ON 22.03.2012.

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.04.2012 IN I.A.596/2012 IN O.P.(M.V) 674/2009 OF THE MACT, PALA.