Kerala High Court
Abdul Jabbar vs Samad on 23 June, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1945
MACA NO. 2228 OF 2017
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTOPMV 914/2015 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM
APPELLANT/3rd RESPONDENT:
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
ICICI LIMBARD HOUSE, 414,VEER SAVARKAR MARG,NEAR SIDHI VINAYAK
TEMPLE,PRABHADEVI,MUMBAI 400 025THROUGH THE LEGAL MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO.KANNANKERY ESTATE, 3RD
FLOOR,SHANMUGHAM ROAD, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI 682 031
BY ADV SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 &2 :
1 ABDUL JABBAR
PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA, KOLIKKOTTUSSERI,
PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 303
2 SAINABHA
W/O.ABDUL JABBAR,PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA,
KOLIKKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 303
3 FATHIMA DHILSHANA
D/O. ABDUL JABBAR,PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA,
KOLIKKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 303
4 FATHIMA FIDA
D/O.ABDUL JABBAR,MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL
GUARDIAN, ABDUL JABBAR, PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA,
KOLIKKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679 303
5 SAMAD
S/O.MARAKKAR, CHEKIDANKUZHIYIL HOUSE,VALANCHERY P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 552
6 SREE RAM NARAYANAN
S/O. PARASURAMAN, KAMALAKAYAM HOUSE, VADAKKETHRA,PAZHAYANNUR
P.O, PIN 680 587
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED
SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
SMT.P.M.SHAHIDA
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.06.2023, ALONG WITH MACA.4010/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1945
MACA NO. 4010 OF 2017
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTOPMV 914/2015 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN THE O.P.(M.V):
1 ABDUL JABBAR,AGED 49 YEARS, PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE,
MUTHUTHALA, KOLIKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DT.
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SAHIDA,
W/O. ABDUL JABBAR, PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA,
KOLIKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DT. 679 303.
2 SAHIDA,AGED 40 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL JABBAR, PANAMKUTTIYIL
HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA, KOLIKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD
DT. 679 303.
3 FATHIMA DILSHANA, AGED 19 YEARS, D/O. ABDUL JABBAR,
PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE, MUTHUTHALA, KOLIKOTTUSSERI,
PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DT. 679 303.
4 FATHIMA FIDA,AGED 13 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER
SAHIDA, W/O. ABDUL JABBAR, PANAMKUTTIYIL HOUSE,
MUTHUTHALA, KOLIKOTTUSSERI, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DT. 679
303.
BY ADV SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN O.P.(MV):
1 SAMAD,AGED NOT KNOWN, S/O.MARAKKAR, CHEKIDANKUZHIYIL
HOUSE, VALANCHERY P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 676 552 (DRIVER OF
KL-8 R-8430 BUS)
2 SREE RAM NARAYANAN(DELETED)
AGED NOT KNOWN, S/O. PARASURAMAN, KAMALALAYAM HOUSE,
VADAKKETHRA, PAZHAYANNUR P.O., 689 587, THRISSUR DT.
(DRIVER OF KL-8 R-8430 BUS)
3 ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414, VEER SAVARKAR MARG, NEAR-SIDHI
VINAYAK TEMPLE, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI - 400 025. (POLICY NO.
3004/A/I-25980538/00/000 AND VALID UP TO 3/4/15).
(RESPONDENT NO. 2 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE
RISK OF APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 10.09.2021 IN IA
1/2021 IN MACA 4010/2017).
3
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
BY ADVS.
SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
ADV. SRI. .LATHEESH SEBASTIAN - SC
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.06.2023, ALONG WITH MACA.2228/2017, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
4
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2023
JUDGMENT
Since these appeals arise from the common award
dated 10.4.2017 in O.P.(MV) No. 914/2015 on the files of
the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam, they are
heard together and are disposed of by this common
judgment. The parties to the appeals will hereinafter be
referred to as petitioners and respondents in accordance
with their status in the claim petition.
2. M.A.C.A No.2228/2017 is preferred by the 3rd
respondent insurance company contending that the
amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
excessive and M.A.C.A. No. 4010/2017 is filed by the
petitioners contending that compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is inadequate.
3. The petitioners 1 and 2 are the parents of
deceased Muhammed Dishad. The petitioners 3 and 4
are the minor siblings of the deceased. According to the
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
petitioners, on 22.3.2015, while the deceased Muhammed
Dishad was riding his motorcycle, a bus bearing
registration No. KL-8/R-8430, driven by the 1st respondent,
hit against the motorcycle and the deceased sustained
serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 9.4.2015
while undergoing treatment. The petitioners claimed an
amount of Rs.25 lakhs as compensation for the death of
the deceased. The Tribunal found that the accident
happened due to the negligence on the part of the first
respondent and awarded an amount of Rs.21,69,350/- as
compensation. The 3rd respondent insurer was held liable
to indemnify the 2nd respondent owner.
4. According to the learned counsel for the
insurance company, the amount awarded by the Tribunal
is excessive and exorbitant. The learned counsel for the
petitioners would contend that the amount awarded is
totally inadequate. In the said circumstances, this Court
has to see whether the compensation awarded is just and
reasonable.
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
5. The deceased was a B.Com student aged 20
years at the time of accident. The Tribunal fixed the
notional income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- per
month. Since the deceased was not having a permanent
employment, Tribunal could have added only 40% of the
income towards future prospects in the light of the
decision in National Insurance Company Limited v.
Pranay Sethi and others [2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)]
Accordingly, I refix the notional income of the deceased as
Rs.14,000/- (Rs.10000+10,000x40/100). The Tribunal has
rightly adopted the multiplier of '18'. The deceased was a
bachelor and ½ of the income has to be deducted
towards his personal and living expenses. Accordingly,
compensation for loss of dependency is re-worked as
(Rs.14,000x12x18x1/2) Rs.15,12,000/-. Since The Tribunal
has already awarded an amount of Rs.16,20,000/- under
the head loss of dependency, an amount of
Rs.1,08,000/- has to be deducted from the total
compensation.
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
6. Towards funeral expenses, an amount of
25,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal. In the light
of the decision in Pranay Sethi (supra), petitioners are
entitled only for an amount of Rs.15,000/- under the head
funeral expenses. Therefore, an amount of Rs.10,000/-
has to be deducted from the total compensation.
7. Towards compensation for loss of love and
affection, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been awarded
by the Tribunal. In the light of the decision in Magma
General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram Alias
Chuhru Ram and Others [(2018) 18 SCC 130] petitioners
are entitled for Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of
consortium. Accordingly, petitioners are entitled for an
amount of Rs.1,60,000/- (Rs.40,000x4) towards loss of
consortium. Since the petitioners are awarded
Rs.1,60,000/- under the head loss of consortium, they are
not entitled for separate amount under the head loss of
love and affection [United India Insurance Company
Ltd., v. Satinder Kaur & Ors. (2021) 11 SCC 780].
Therefore, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded under the
M.A.C.A. Nos.2228 of 2017 & 4010 of 2017
head love and affection has to be deducted.
8. I find the compensation awarded under other
heads as just and reasonable.
9. Accordingly, the award passed by the Tribunal is
modified and the petitioners will be entitled only for an
amount of Rs.21,11,350/-. (Rs.21,69350-Rs.1,08,000-
10,000+Rs.160,000- 100000).
Pursuant to the direction of this Court dated
18.7.2017 in M.A.C.A.No.2228/2017, the insurance
company has deposited 50% of the award amount with
interest and costs before the Tribunal. The insurance
company shall deposit the balance amount as modified by
this Court with 9% interest p.a. and proportionate costs
before the Tribunal within a period of two months.
The appeals are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
JUDGE
al/-+
