Kerala High Court
Firoz Babu vs Ali 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. 46 OF 2014
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 08.04.2013 IN OP(MV) NO.490 OF 2010 OF
MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
IROZ BABU,
F
AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O. IBRAHIM, RESIDING AT AMBALAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
PUTHIYANCHERIKKAVU, P.O.PERUMBILAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
Y ADVS.
B
SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
SRI.A.R.NIMOD
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1
ALI,
S/O. ENI, RESIDING AT PONNACHAN VALAPPIL HOUSE,
CHERAVALLUR P.O., PERUMBADAPPU,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 580.
2
ABDUL LATHEEF P.K.,
S/O. KUNJUMOHAMMED, RESIDING AT PALIYAMPATTAYIL HOUSE,
PERUMPILAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 519.
3
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
PEEVEES BUILDING, KUTTIPURAM ROAD, VALANCHERY,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 552.
MACA 46 of 2014 2
4
ABDUL GAFOOR,
RESIDING AT MANKULANGARA HOUSE, PERUMPILAVU P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 519.
R3 BY ADVS.SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD, STANDING COUNSEL
SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR, STANDING COUNSEL
SMT.ALICE THOMAS, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS
MOTOR
ACCIDENTS CLAIMS
APPEAL HAVING BEEN
FINALLY
EARD
H ON
22.05.2024, THE
COURT
ON
THE
SAME
DAY
DELIVERED
THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA 46 of 2014 3
J U D G M E N T
ThisappealisattheinstanceoftheclaimantinOP(MV)
No.490 of 2010 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Ottapalam, challengingtheawardontheground
of inadequacy of compensation.
2. On 13.12.2009, at 7.00 a.m., the appellant met
with a road traffic accident while he was travelling in
KL-8/S-3211 autorickshaw drivenby the2ndrespondent.
The auto rickshaw capsized duetotherashand negligent
driving by the 2nd respondent, and he sustained serious
injuries including fracture of both bones of his right leg.
He was hospitalised for 35 days in total and suffered
disability of 11% due to the injuries suffered. He
approached the Tribunal claiming compensation of
Rs.6,45,000/-. But the Tribunal awarded only
Rs.4,73,100/- and hence this appeal.
MACA 46 of 2014 4
3. The1strespondentwastheowneroftheoffending
auto rickshaw, 2nd respondent was its driver, 3rd
respondent was its Insurer, and 4th respondent was the
insured.The3rdrespondent-Insureradmittedtheaccident
as well as 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 theappellantwasworkingasaclerkinGulfcountries
andhereturnedtohisnativeonlyon08.12.2009toattend
themarriageofhissister.On13.12.2009,hemetwiththe
accident. Hewas earning monthlyincomeofRs.15,000/-
fromhis workinGulfcountries. But learnedTribunalfixed
MACA 46 of 2014 5
his notional income @ Rs.5,000/- only, and according to
him, it is on the lower side.
7. The First Information Statement given by the
appellant before Police says that, he was working in Gulf
countries and he produced Ext.A16 certified copy of
passport also to substantiatethat fact.But nodocuments
were produced by him to prove his monthly income.
Learned counsel for theappellant wouldsubmit that even
going by the decision Ramachandrappa v. Manager,
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company
Limited [AIR 2011 SC2951],evenacoolieworkerwas
eligible to get his notional income fixed @ Rs.7,000/- in
the year 2009. Since the appellant was employed in Gulf
countries, according to him, he was eligible to get his
notional income fixed more than that.
MACA 46 of 2014 6
8.The salary,ifany, receivedbytheappellantbefore
the Gulf countries cannot be equated with the income,
which he oughttohave receivedinIndia, consideringthe
expenses he had to incur there, and also the unstable
natureof theemployment there.Consideringthefactthat
hewasworkinginGulfcountries,priortotheaccidentand
he was aged only 24, this Court is inclined to fix his
notional income @ Rs.8,000/- per month.
9. Towards loss of earning for six months @
Rs.8,000/-, the appellant is entitled to get Rs.48,000/-.
After deducting Rs.30,000/- already awarded, he is
entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.18,000/-.
10. Towards bystander expenses, learned Tribunal
awarded only Rs.200/- per day for 35 days of
hospitalisation. Since the accident was in the year 2009,
this Courtis inclinedtogrant Rs.300/- per dayduringthe
MACA 46 of 2014 7
period of hospitalisation, which will come to Rs.10,500/-
(300x35). AfterdeductingRs.7,000/-alreadyawarded,he
is entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.3,500/- as
enhancement under the head 'bystander expenses'.
11. For pain and suffering, the appellant claimed
Rs.35,000/- before the Tribunal, and Rs.25,000/- was
awarded. Theappellantsufferedfractureofbothbonesof
rightleg. Hehadundergonesurgicalprocedures,including
bonegraftingandhewashospitalisedfor35days.So,this
CourtisinclinedtoawardRs.5,000/-moreunderthehead
'pain and suffering'.
12. Towards loss of amenities also, this Court is
inclined to award Rs.5,000/- more as the appellant who
was a 24 year old man suffered 11% disability, with
sensory impairment on his left thigh, right leg etc. and
shortening by one inch.
MACA 46 of 2014 8
13. For 11%disability,taking hismonthly income@
Rs.8,000/-, he is eligible to get Rs.1,90,080/-
(8,000x12x18x11/100). After deducting Rs.1,18,800/-
already awarded by the Tribunal, heis entitledtoget the
balance amount of Rs.71,280/-.
Head of claim Amount Amount ifference to
D
warded by
a awarded in be drawn as
the Tribunal appeal enhanced
compensation
Loss of earning Rs.30,000/- Rs.48,000/- Rs.18,000/-
ystander
B
expenses Rs.7,000/- Rs.10,500/- Rs.3,500/-
Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/- Rs.30,000/- Rs.5,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs.15,000/- Rs.20,000/- Rs.5,000/-
ompensation for
C
permanent Rs.1,18,800/- Rs.1,90,080/- Rs.71,280/-
disability
Total Rs.1,02,780/-
14. In the result, the appellant is entitled to get
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,02,780/- in total.
15. The3rd respondent-Insurerisdirected todeposit
the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,02,780/- (RupeeOne
MACA 46 of 2014 9
LakhTwoThousandSevenHundredandEightyonly),with
9% interest per annum, from the date of petition till the
date of deposit, (excluding 145 days ofdelay infilingthe
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.
Theappeal isallowedtotheextent asabove,andno
order is made as to costs.
Sd/-
SOPHY THOMAS
JUDGE
DSV/-
