Kerala High Court
P. Balamukundan vs Ranjith on 22 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
ND
WEDNESDAY, THE 22
DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
MACA NO. 657 OF 2014
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 07.08.2013 IN OP(MV) NO.746 OF 2010 OF
MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM.
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
. BALAMUKUNDAN,
P
AGED 50 YEARS,
S/O.KALLIANI AMMA, PADINHARE VEEDU, THEKKUMANGALAM, LAKKIDI,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1
RANJITH,
AGED 25 YEARS,
S/O.PRABHAKARAN K, KALATHIL HOUSE, VADASSERY, OTTAPALAM
TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 679 001. (RIDER OF KL-9-R-5156
MOTOR CYCLE).
2
P.PRABHATH,
AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, PRATHAP NIWAS, ILLATH
KULAMBIL, KARIKKODE. 679 001.(OWNER OF KL-9-R-5156 MOTOR
CYCLE).
3
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
N.S.TOWERS, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR STADIUM BUS STAND, COIMBATORE
ROAD, KUNNATHURMEDU, PALAKKAD. (INSURER OF KL-9-R-5156 MOTOR
CYCLE, POLICY VALID FROM 15.02.2010 TO 14-02-2011). 679 001.
MACA 657 of 2014 2
Y ADVS.
B
SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD, STANDING COUNSEL, NEW INDIA
ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
SRI.RAJESH THOMAS
SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY
THIS
MOTOR
ACCIDENT
CLAIMS
APPEAL HAVING BEEN
FINALLY
EARD
H ON
22.05.2024,
THE
COURT
ON
THE
SAME
DAY
DELIVERED
THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA 657 of 2014 3
J U D G M E N T
ThisappealisattheinstanceoftheclaimantinOP(MV)
No.746 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Ottapalam, impugning the award on the ground
of inadequacy of compensation.
2. The appellant met with a road traffic accident on
31.03.2010, at 9.45 a.m., while he was standing by the
side of the road.KL-51-3241 motorbikeridden bythe 1st
respondent, ina rashand negligentmanner,knocked him
down, and he sustained serious injuries, resulting in
disabilityalso. Hewasadmittedandtreatedinhospitalfor
three days. He approached the Tribunal claiming
compensation of Rs.3,50,000/-. But learned Tribunal
awarded only Rs.47,200/- and hence this appeal.
3. The 1strespondent was therideroftheoffending
motorcycle, 2nd respondent was its owner and 3rd
MACA 657 of 2014 4
respondent was its Insurer. The 3rd respondent-Insurer
entered appearance and admitted the Policy.
4. Now this Court is called upon to answer whether
there is any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the
impugned award, warranting interference by this Court.
5.Heardlearnedcounselfortheappellantandlearned
counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurer.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit
that the appellant was the Chief Advisor of LIC, earning
monthly income of Rs.32,500/-. Ext.A13 document was
produced by the appellant before the Tribunal, showing
receipt of his insurance commission. But that document
waswithrespecttotheperiod2008-2009. Theaccidentin
question occurred on 31.03.2010. No document was
produced to prove his income during the relevant period.
Eventhen, considering thefact that the3rdrespondentis
MACA 657 of 2014 5
not disputing the occupation of the appellant as an LIC
agent, anyhow he would have been getting income more
than Rs.4,000/-, fixed by the Tribunal. Going by the
decision Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal
SundaramAllianceInsuranceCompanyLimited[AIR
2011 SC 2951], even a coolie was eligible to get his
notionalincomefixed@Rs.7,500/-intheyear2010.Since
theappellantwasanLICagent,thisCourtisinclinedtofix
his monthly income notionally @ Rs.10,000/-. Learned
Tribunal assessed loss of earning for two months @
Rs.4,000/-. Since we have fixed his notional income @
Rs.10,000/-, he is eligible to get Rs.20,000/- in total,
under the head 'loss of earning'. After deducting
Rs.8,000/- already awarded, he is entitled to get
Rs.12,000 as enhancement under the head 'loss of
earning'.
MACA 657 of 2014 6
7. Under the head 'bystander expenses', learned
Tribunal awarded Rs.200/- each for three days of
hospitalisation amounting to Rs.600/-. Since the accident
was in the year 2010, this Court is inclined to award
bystander expenses @ Rs.400/- per day for three days,
which will come to Rs.1,200/-. After deducting Rs.600/-
already awarded, he will get the balance Rs.600/- as
enhancement under the head 'bystander expenses'.
8. Towards extra nourishment, learned Tribunal
awarded only Rs.600/-. The injuries suffered by the
appellantincludefractureofleftzygoma,whichmaycause
difficulty in taking normal food. Considering that aspect,
thisCourtisinclinedtoawardRs.400/-moretowardsextra
nourishment.
9. Towards disability compensation and loss of
amenities together,learned Tribunal awardedRs.13,440/-,
MACA 657 of 2014 7
taking his monthly income @ Rs.4,000/-. We have fixed
his notional income as Rs.10,000/-. So, for the disability
alone, he is entitled to get Rs.33,600/-
(10,000x12x14x2/100). After deducting Rs.13,440/-, he
will get the balance amount of Rs.20,160/-, as
enhancement under the head 'disability compensation'.
10. Towards loss of amenities, the appellant claimed
Rs.5,000/-.Hehadsufferedfractureofdistalendofradius
and fracture of left zygoma, resulting in 2% permanent
disability.Considering thataspect, thisCourtisinclinedto
award Rs.5,000/- towards loss of amenities.
Head of claim mount
A mount
A ifference to
D
awarded by awarded in be drawn as
the Tribunal appeal enhanced
compensation
Loss of earning Rs.8,000/- Rs.20,000/- Rs.12,000/-
ystander
B
expenses Rs.600/- Rs.1,200/- Rs.600/-
MACA 657 of 2014 8
Extra nourishment Rs.600/- Rs.1,000/- Rs.400/-
isability
D Rs.33,600/- Rs.20,160/-
compensation
Rs.13,440/-
Loss of amenities Rs.5,000/- Rs.5,000/-
Total Rs.38,160/-
11.Hence,theappellantisentitledtogetRs.38,160/-
as enhanced compensation.
12. The3rd respondent-Insurerisdirected todeposit
the enhanced compensation of Rs.38,160/- (Rupee Thirty
Eight Thousand One Hundred and Sixty only), with 9%
interest per annum, from thedate ofpetitiontill thedate
of deposit, (excluding 114 days of delay in filing the
appeal) before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Ottapalam,withinaperiodoftwomonthsfromthedateof
receipt of a copy of this judgment. LearnedTribunalshall
disburse that amount to the appellant after deducting his
liabilities, if any, towards tax, balance court fee, legal
benefit funds etc.
MACA 657 of 2014 9
Theappeal isallowedtotheextent asabove,andno
order is made as to costs.
Sd/-
SOPHY THOMAS
JUDGE
DSV/-
