Girish vs Moosa
2024 Latest Caselaw 30376 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 30376 Ker
Judgement Date : 25 October, 2024

Kerala High Court

Girish vs Moosa on 25 October, 2024

                                                     2024:KER:81169
MACA No.2189/2015
                                ..1..

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

     FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946

                        MACA NO. 2189 OF 2015

         OPMV NO.656 OF 2013 OF PRINCIPAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS

                         TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

          GIRISH, AGED 35 YEARS
          S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, KATTAYAT HOUSE, KUTTIKATTUR P.O.,
          MEDICAL COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE.

          BY ADV SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1     MOOSA, S/O.ALI, 12/661, KIZHAKU, VEETIL MEETHAL,
          POOVATTU PARAMBU.P.O., PERUVAYAL, KOZHIKODE.673 024.

    2     MUHAMMED UVAIS
          S/O.MOIDEEN KOYA, NALUVAYAL, LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY,
          PURAKKATTIRY.P.O., THALAKKULATHUR, KOZHIKODE.673 001.

    3     NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, NOOR COMPLEX,
          MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE.673 001.

          BY ADVS.
          VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN
          SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH
          B.ANUSREE(K/000951/2016)
          MIRAL K.JOY(K/2005/2022)
          ABHILASH C.V.(K/003168/2023)
          VARUN JACOB(K/003405/2023)


     THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 25.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                             2024:KER:81169
MACA No.2189/2015
                                   ..2..



                               JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.656 of

2013 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode. The

respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. The case of the appellant/claimant is that on

19.08.2012, while he was walking along the side of the public road at

Poovattuparamba, a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KL-11-AM-4760 driven

by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit against

him, whereby he sustained serious injuries. He approached the tribunal

claiming a total compensation of ₹1,50,000/-.

3. Respondents 1 and 2 remained ex parte 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 A6

series were marked on the side of the appellant/claimant and Exts.B1 &

B2 were marked on the side of the respondent insurer. The tribunal,

after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held that the

accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver of the

offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹53,261/- as compensation

under different heads against the third respondent being the insurer, 2024:KER:81169

..3..

with right of recovery against the first respondent being the RC owner.

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, the

learned counsel for the first respondent 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 - The learned counsel for the appellant

submits that though the appellant claimed that, being a driver by

profession, he was earning ₹9,000/- per month, the tribunal has fixed the

notional monthly income only at ₹4,500/-. Admittedly, no document was

produced by the appellant to prove income. However, as per the

judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance

Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 13 SCC 236], the notional monthly

income of the appellant ought to have been fixed at ₹8,500/-.

Accordingly, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I deem

it appropriate to fix the notional monthly income of the appellant at

₹8,500/-.

5.2. Loss of earnings - Since the notional monthly income of 2024:KER:81169

..4..

the appellant is refixed at ₹8,500/-, compensation towards loss of

earnings for a period of three months has to be recalculated, which

would come to ₹25,500/-. Since the tribunal already awarded an amount

of ₹13,500/-, there will be additional compensation of ₹12,000/- under

this head.

5.3. Pain and suffering - The learned counsel for the

appellant submits that though the appellant claimed ₹40,000/- towards

pain and suffering, the tribunal awarded only ₹20,000/-. Considering the

injuries sustained by him and the sufferings that he had undergone, I

am inclined to grant an amount of ₹30,000/- to the appellant as total

compensation towards pain and suffering. Thus, the appellant will be

entitled to get an additional amount of ₹10,000/- as compensation

towards pain and suffering.

5.4. Loss of amenities - Though the appellant claimed an

amount of ₹40,000/- under this head, the tribunal awarded only an

amount of ₹5,000/-, which, according to the appellant, is on the lower

side. Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, I deem it

appropriate to award a total compensation of ₹25,000/- towards loss of

amenities. Thus, the appellant will be entitled to get an additional

amount of ₹20,000/- towards loss of amenities.

6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of 2024:KER:81169

..5..

compensation under other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I

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     36000       13500      12000          25500
2.     Transport to          5000        1000                      1000
       hospital

       clothing and
       articles
4.     Extra nourishment    20000       1000                       1000
5.     Bystander             7000       2800                       2800
       expenses
6.     Treatment            28000       9461                       9461
       expenses
7.     Pain and             40000       20000      10000          30000
       sufferings
8.     Loss of amenities    40000        5000      20000          25000
       Total                            53261      42000          95261

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is

awarded an additional compensation of ₹42,000/- (Rupees forty two

thousand only) over and above the compensation awarded by the

tribunal with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till

realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer shall 2024:KER:81169

..6..

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, and shall recover the said amount from the first respondent.

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. However, it is made

clear that the enhanced compensation will not carry interest for the

period of delay of 57 days in filing the appeal.