Kerala High Court
Kallianikutty vs Mohammad Sali on 4 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
TH
TUESDAY, THE 4
DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1946
MACA NO. 151 OF 2013
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 21.07.2012 IN OPMV NO.28 OF 2009 OF
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , MANJERI
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1
KALLIANIKUTTY, AGED 58 YEARS,
W/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR, JAYESH NIVAS,
ARAKKUPARAMBA P.O., PERINTHALMANNA TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2
BINDU, 32 YEARS, D/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR,
JAYESH NIVAS, ARAKKUPARAMBA P.O.,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
3
REGHA, 30 YEARS, D/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR,
JAYESH NIVAS, ARAKKUPARAMBA P.O.,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
4
JAYESH, 28 YEARS, S/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR,
JAYESH NIVAS, ARAKKUPARAMBA P.O.,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
Y ADVS.
B
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1
MOHAMMED SALI,
S/O.KOMU, ALAYAN HOUSE, KOTTOPADAM P.O., MANNARKKAD,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT (DRIVER) - 679 534.
MACA 151 of 2013 2
2
SHANAVAS, S/O.KUNHALI HAJI, CHERUMALAYIL HOUSE,
KOTTOPADAM P.O., MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
(OWNER) - 679 534.
3
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
JASEELA COMPLEX, NILAMBUR ROAD,
MANJERI P.O. - 676 121.
R3 BY ADV A.R.GEORGE, SC, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
THIS
MOTOR
ACCIDENT
CLAIMS
APPEAL HAVING BEEN
FINALLY
EARD
H ON
04.06.2024,
THE
COURT
ON
THE
SAME
DAY
DELIVERED
THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA 151 of 2013 3
J U D G M E N T
TheclaimantsinOP(MV)No.28of2009onthefileofMotor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri, filedthisappealimpugning
the award on the ground of inadequacy of compensation.
2. One Mr.Sivaraman Nair, who is the husbandofthe1st
appellant and father of appellants 2 to 4, died in a motor
accident occurred on 18.03.2008. While he was walking
throughthesideoftheroadatAngadippuram,hewasknocked
downbyanautorickshawbearingregistrationNo.KL-9/R-9712,
whichwasdrivenbythe1strespondentinarashandnegligent
manner. He was rushed to Moulana Hospital, Perinthalmanna,
but he succumbed to the injuries on the next day. His legal
representativesapproachedtheTribunalclaimingcompensation
ofRs.4,00,000/-.ButtheTribunalawardedonlyRs.2,48,378/-.
Hence this appeal.
3. The 3rd respondent-Insurer entered appearance and
contested the matter before the Tribunal. They admitted the
accident and Policy of the offending vehicle. Learned Tribunal
MACA 151 of 2013 4
foundthattheaccidentoccurredduetotherashandnegligent
driving of the offending autorickshaw by the 1st respondent,
whichwasownedbythe2ndrespondent.Sincetherewasvalid
Policy for that vehicle as on the date of the accident, the 3rd
respondent-Insurer was found liable to indemnify the insured
and thereby to compensate the claimants.
4. NowthisCourtiscalledupontoanswerwhetherthere
is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the impugned
award warranting interference by this Court.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurer.
6. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent would submit
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable, and it needs no modification. But learned counsel
for the appellants would submit that the compensation
awarded is too meager and so it has to be enhanced.
7. According to the appellants, the deceased was a 61
year old Security Guard, earning monthly income of
Rs.3,000/-. Learned Tribunal accepted his monthly income as
MACA 151 of 2013 5
claimed by the appellants and assessed compensation for loss
ofdependencyasRs.2,16,000/-adoptingmultiplierof9.But⅓
was seen deducted towards personal expenses. The deceased
wassurvivedbyhiswifeagedonly55yearsandthreechildren.
The eldest daughter was only 30 years old. So, learned
Tribunaloughttohavefoundalltheclaimantsasdependentsof
the deceased andso,only¼wasliabletobedeductedforthe
personal expenses of the deceased. So his monthly income
could have been taken as Rs.2,250 [3,000-(3000x¼)]. The
multiplier applicable was only 7asthedeceasedwasaged61.
So the compensation for loss of dependency could have been
assessed as Rs.1,89,000/- (2,250x12x7). Since Rs.2,16,000/-
was awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'loss of
dependency',thereisanexcessawardofRs.27,000/-,whichis
liable to be deducted from the compensationamountawarded
by the Tribunal under that head.
8. Under the head 'loss of consortium', learned Tribunal
awarded only Rs.10,000/-, and under the head 'loss of love
and affection' awarded Rs.10,000/-, totalling Rs.20,000/-. As
MACA 151 of 2013 6
per the decision National Insurance Company Ltd. v.
Pranay Sethi and Others, [(2017) 16 SCC 680], the
appellants were entitled to get Rs.40,000/- each under the
head 'loss of consortium', which will come to Rs.1,60,000/- in
total. After deducting Rs.20,000/- already awarded by the
Tribunal, they are entitled to get the balance amount of
Rs.1,40,000/-.
9. Under the head 'loss of estate', learned Tribunal
awarded only Rs.5,000/-. Relying on Pranay Sethi's case
cited supra, theywereeligibletogetRs.15,000/-andso,they
will get the balance Rs.10,000/- as enhancement under the
head 'loss of estate'.
10. Towards funeral expenses, only Rs.3,000/- was seen
awarded by the Tribunal. Based on Pranay Sethi'scasecited
supra, they were eligible to get Rs.15,000/-. So, they will get
the balance Rs.12,000/- under the head 'funeral expenses'.
11. The compensation awarded under all other heads
seems to be reasonable and it needs no modification.
MACA 151 of 2013 7
Head of claim Amount Amount Amounts ifference to
D
warded by
a awarded in deducted in be drawn as
the Tribunal appeal appeal enhanced
compensation
oss of
L
dependency Rs.2,16,000/- Rs.1,89,000/- Rs.27,000/-
oss of
L
consortium Rs.10,000/- Rs.1,60,000/- Rs.1,40,000/-
oss of love and
L Rs.10,000/-
affection
Loss of estate Rs.5,000/- Rs.15,000/- Rs.10,000/-
uneral
F Rs.3,000/- Rs.15,000/- Rs.12,000/-
expenses
Total Rs.27,000/- Rs.1,62,000/-
Enhanced compensation is Rs.1,35,000/-(1,62,000 -27,000)
12. In the result, the appellants are entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,35,000/-.
13. The 3rd respondent-Insurer isdirectedtodepositthe
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,35,000/- (Rupees One Lakh
Thirty Five Thousand only) with interest @ 8% per annum,
from the date of petition till the date of deposit, before the
MotorAccidentsClaimsTribunal,Manjeri,withinaperiodoftwo
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
MACA 151 of 2013 8
Learned Tribunal shall disburse that amount toappellants1to
4 in the ratio 70:10:10:10, after deducting their liabilities, if
any, towards tax, balance court fee, legal benefit fund etc.
The appeal is allowed to the extent as above, and no
order is made as to costs.
Sd/-
SOPHY THOMAS
JUDGE
DSV/-
