Kerala High Court
Girish D vs The New India Assurance Company Ltd on 1 November, 2024
2024:KER:81175
MACA No.33/2022
..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1946
MACA NO. 33 OF 2022
OPMV NO.1331 OF 2017 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
GIRISH D., AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.DAMODARAN, VANAJA BHAVAN,
ENADI KARA, ENADI P.O., CHEMPU VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 608.
BY ADV JOSSY KURIAN
RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER.
BY ADV CHANDINI G.NAIR
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 01.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:81175
MACA No.33/2022
..2..
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No. 1331
of 2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam.
The respondent herein was the second respondent before the tribunal.
2. The case of the appellant/claimant is that on
15.11.2015, while he was riding a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL-36-D-
7146 through the Moolekadavu - Neerpara road, another motorcycle
bearing Reg.No.KL-5-AG-4742 ridden by the third respondent in a rash
and negligent manner, hit against the motorcycle ridden by the
appellant, whereby he sustained serious injuries. He approached the
tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹4,00,000/-.
3. Before the tribunal, the respondent insurer filed a
written statement, admitting the policy coverage for the offending
vehicle, but disputing the liability and quantum of compensation
claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side of
the appellant/claimant and Ext.X1 as court exhibit. No evidence was
adduced by the respondents. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings
and materials on record, held that the accident took place on account of
the negligence of the rider of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum
2024:KER:81175
..3..
of ₹2,56,173/-, rounded off to ₹2,56,170/-, as compensation under
different heads against the second respondent being the insurer.
Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal,
the claimant has come up in appeal.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims
enhancement under the following heads:
5.1. Notional income/permanent disability - The learned
counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was working in Taj
Hotel, Kumarakom, as Housekeeping Supervisor, however, the tribunal
has fixed the notional monthly income only at ₹10,000/- for assessing
compensation towards permanent disability, which is on the lower side.
It is a fact that the appellant was a permanent employee in Taj Hotel,
Kumarakom and there was no case of loss of avocation, salary or
promotion due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Further, on a
perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has applied the correct
standards for assessing compensation towards permanent disability.
Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the notional
monthly income fixed by the tribunal or the compensation awarded by
2024:KER:81175
..4..
the tribunal towards permanent disability.
5.2. Loss of amenities - Though the appellant claimed an
amount of ₹50,000/- under this head, the tribunal awarded only an
amount of ₹5,000/-, which, according to the appellant, is on the lower
side. Considering the age of the appellant and the nature of injuries
sustained by the appellant, I deem it appropriate to award a total
compensation of ₹40,000/- towards loss of amenities. Thus, the appellant
will be entitled to get an additional amount of ₹35,000/- towards loss of
amenities.
5.3. Bystander expenses - The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that while awarding compensation towards bystander
expenses, the tribunal granted only ₹250/- per day for six days, which is
on the lower side. Considering the fact that the accident occurred in the
year 2015, I deem it appropriate to award an amount of ₹400/- per day
towards bystander expenses. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get a
total compensation of ₹2,400/- (400 x 6) towards bystander expenses.
Since the tribunal already awarded an amount of ₹1,500/-, there will be
additional compensation of ₹900/- under this head.
6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of
compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I
2024:KER:81175
..5..
am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the
tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable.
Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal is modified as follows:
Sl.
No. Head of Claim Amount Amount Modified Total
claimed awarded in appeal compensation
(in ₹) by the (in ₹) (in ₹)
tribunal
(in ₹)
1. Loss of earnings 80000 47410 47410
2. Medical and 50000 62663 62663
miscellaneous
expenses
3. Bystander 10000 1500 900 2400
expenses
4. Transportation 10000 1000 1000
expenses
5. Extra nourishment 8000 1200 1200
6. Damage to 2000 1000 1000
clothing etc.
7. Pain and suffering 60000 50000 50000
8. Loss of earning 200000 86400 86400
power due to
permanent
disability
9. Loss of amenities 50000 5000 35000 40000
and convenience
Total 480000 256173 35900 292070
Limited rounded
to off to
400000 256170
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is
awarded an additional compensation of ₹35,900/- (Rupees thirty five
2024:KER:81175
..6..
thousand and nine hundred only) over and above the compensation
awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of
petition till realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer
shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment. The appellant shall furnish copies of the PAN Card,
AADHAAR Card and bank details before the respondent insurer within a
period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the
deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it
shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount
before the tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount
shall be disbursed to the appellant at the earliest in accordance with
law.
SD/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
bka/-
