Kerala High Court
Pathumabi.K.P vs Moiteen Koya on 13 August, 2025
M.A.C.A. No.533 of 2020
1
2025:KER:61156
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1947
MACA NO. 533 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 27.06.2019 IN OP(MV)NO.837 OF 2018
ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOZHIKODE.
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 PATHUMABI.K.P.,
AGED 54 YEARS,
W/O. HASSAN.M.C.,RESIDING AT KANNADI PARAMBA MEETHAL
CHALIL HO, MATHOTTAM, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE-673 028.
2 RIYAS.M.C.,
AGED 36 YEARS,
S/O. HASSAN.M.C., VALIYAKATH HOUSE,
ERANHIVAYAL, BEYPORE-673 028.
3 RAJEESH.M.C.,
AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O. HASSAN.M.C.,
RESIDING AT KANNADI PARAMBA MEETHAL CHALIL HO,
MATHOTTAM, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE-673 028.
4 RAJULA.M.C.,
AGED 35 YEARS,
D/O. HASSAN.M.C., W/O. MUJEEB, KODAVANA HO,
AVARAYIL PARAMB, NALLALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 027.
BY ADV.
SRI.A.V.M.SALAHUDDEEN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 MOITEEN KOYA,
S/O. AHMED KOYA, AGE NOT KNOWN,
C.M.MANZIL, KACHINAM THODUKA PARAPPIL P.O.,
HALWA BAZAR, KOZHIKODE-673 001
M.A.C.A. No.533 of 2020
2
2025:KER:61156
2 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
2ND FLOOR, CITADEL ARCAE, RC ROAD, CALICUT-673 032,
REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER.
BY ADVS.
SRI.JITHIN SAJI ISAAC
SHRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC
DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY
SHRI.SHAMSUDEEN O.K.
SMT.K.S.SANTHI
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HERAING ON 13.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A. No.533 of 2020
3
2025:KER:61156
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.533 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
(the Act) has been filed by the claim petitioners in O.P.(MV)
No.837/2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Kozhikode (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of compensation
granted by Award dated 27/06/2019. The respondents herein are the
respondents in the petition. In this appeal, the parties and the documents
will be referred to as described in the original petition.
2. The claim petitioners are the wife and children of the
deceased. According to the claim petitioners, on 22/01/2018 at about
08:00 a.m., while the deceased was pillion riding on motorcycle bearing
registration no.KL-11-U-8515 ridden by the first respondent from
Vattakinar to Arakkinar and when he reached the place by name
Vanasree Mathottam, due to the rash and negligent riding of the latter,
2025:KER:61156
the motorcycle collided with motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-11-
U-7035, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries to which he
succumbed. An amount of ₹8,00,000/- was claimed as compensation
under various heads.
3. The first respondent/owner-cum-driver did not file
written statement.
4. The second respondent/insurer filed written statement
admitting the policy, but denying liability. The age, occupation, income
etc. were disputed. It was also contended that the amount claimed was
exorbitant.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced by
the either side. Exts.A1 to A6 were marked on the side of the claim
petitioners. Ext.B1 was adduced by the respondents.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the documentary
evidence and after hearing both sides, found negligence on the part of
the first respondent/owner-cum-rider of the offending motorcycle
resulting in the incident and hence awarded an amount of ₹6,94,000/-
together with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of the petition till
2025:KER:61156
the date of realisation along with proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the
Award, the claim petitioners have come up in appeal.
7. The only point that arises for consideration in this
appeal is whether there is any infirmity in the findings of the Tribunal
calling for an interference by this Court.
8. Heard both sides.
9. The award of compensation by the Tribunal under the
following head is challenged by the claim petitioners -
Notional income
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim petitioners
that the deceased, a coolie aged 65 years, was earning ₹20,000/- per
month. However, the Tribunal fixed the notional income at ₹9,000/-,
which is quite low and hence, the same needs to be appropriately
enhanced.
9.1. In the light of the dictum in Ramachandrappa v.
Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236,
the notional income of the deceased can be fixed as ₹11,500/- per
month.
2025:KER:61156
10. The impugned Award is modified to the following
extent :
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in appeal
No. claimed Awarded by
Tribunal
1 Loss of ₹5,00,000/- ₹5,04,000/- ₹6,44,000/-
dependency (₹11,500/- x
12x2/3x7)
2 Spousal ₹1,00,000/- ₹40,000/- ₹40,000/-
consortium (No modification)
3 Parental -- ₹1,20,000/- ₹1,20,000/-
consortium (No modification)
4 Loss of estate ₹1,00,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
(No modification)
5 Funeral expenses ₹50,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
(No modification)
Total ₹6,94,000/- ₹8,34,000/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹1,40,000/- (total compensation =
₹8,34,000/-, that is, ₹6,94,000/- granted by the Tribunal + ₹1,40,000/-
granted in appeal) with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the
date of petition till date of realization (excluding the period of 58 days
2025:KER:61156
delay in filing the appeal) and proportionate costs. The second
respondent/insurer is directed to deposit the compensation with interest
and costs before the Tribunal within a period of 60 days from the date of
receipt of a copy of the judgment. On deposit of the compensation
amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the claim petitioners
at the earliest in accordance with law after making deductions, if any.
The liberty given by the Tribunal to the second
respondent/insurer to recover the award amount from the first
respondent/owner-cum-driver shall stand confirmed.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
C.S. SUDHA
JUDGE
ak
