Kerala High Court
Subair vs The New India Insurance Co.Ltd on 18 August, 2025
M.A.C.A. No.702 of 2020
1
2025:KER:62175
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 27TH SRAVANA, 1947
MACA NO. 702 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 02.04.2019 IN OP(MV)NO.495 OF
2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
VATAKARA.
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SUBAIR,
AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O.BADARUDHEEN, RESIDING AT KUTTIKATTIL HOUSE,
CHELIYA, KOYILANDY(PO), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 004.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.A.V.M.SALAHUDDEEN
SMT.A.D.DIVYA
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
DOOR NO.5/86 P, IIND FLOOR, FAIRMONT BUILDING,
ERANHIPALAM, WAYANAD ROAD, CALICUT-673 006,
REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER.
BY ADV SHRI.N.S.MOHAMED USMAN
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 18.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A. No.702 of 2020
2
2025:KER:62175
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No.702 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 (the Act) has been filed by the claim petitioner in O.P.(MV)
No.495/2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Vatakara (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of compensation
granted by Award dated 02/04/2019. The sole respondent herein is
the third respondent in the petition. In this appeal, the parties and the
documents will be referred to as described in the original petition.
2. According to the claim petitioner, on 21/11/2015 at
about 01:30 p.m., while he was riding motorcycle bearing registration
no.KL-56-G-7237 from Koyilandy side and when he reached the
place by name Arangadath, lorry bearing registration No.KL-04-R-
7227, driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner
dashed against his motorcycle, as a result of which he sustained
2025:KER:62175
grievous injuries.
3. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver remained ex parte.
4. The third respondent/insurer filed written statement
admitting the policy, but denying negligence on the part of the second
respondent/driver of the offending lorry. The age, occupation and
income were disputed. It was also contended that the amount claimed
was excessive.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced
by either side. Exts.A1 to A8 were marked on the side of the claim
petitioner. No documentary evidence was produced by the
respondents. Ext.C1 disability certificate was also marked.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the documentary
evidence and after hearing both sides, found negligence on the part of
the second respondent/driver of the offending lorry resulting in the
incident and hence awarded an amount of ₹7,71,700/- together with
interest @ 8% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of
realisation along with proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award,
2025:KER:62175
the claim petitioner has 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 heads is challenged by the claim petitioner -
Notional income
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim petitioner
that the latter, a 24 year old Interior Designer, was earning ₹15,000/-
per month. However, the Tribunal fixed the notional income of the
claim petitioner at ₹8,000/-, which is quite low and hence, the same
needs to be appropriately enhanced.
9.1. No materials have been produced to substantiate the
allegation regarding the avocation or income. In the light of the
dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram
Alliance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236, the notional income of the
claim petitioner can be fixed as ₹10,000/- per month.
2025:KER:62175
Loss of earnings
10. The materials on record show that the claim
petitioner sustained the following injuries-
"1. Type III B Open fracture both bone right
leg with raw area.
2. Crush injury right ankle"
He was hospitalized for a period of 119 days. In all probability, he
might have been unable to work for a period of 9 months. Therefore,
he can be awarded - ₹10,000/- x 9months = ₹90,000/-.
11. The learned counsel for the claim petitioner also
advanced arguments to the effect that the compensation that has been
awarded under the other heads are on the lower side and that it needs
to be enhanced. However, on going through the impugned Award, I
find that the amount that has been awarded under all the other heads
are quite reasonable, therefore, no interference into the same is called
for.
12. The impugned Award is modified to the following
extent :
2025:KER:62175
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
Tribunal
1 Loss of earning ₹75,000/- ₹56,000/- ₹90,000/-
(₹10,000/-x 9 months)
2 Transport to ₹20,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
hospital (No modification)
3 Extra ₹50,000/- ₹95,200/- ₹95,200/-
nourishment & (No modification)
bystander's
expenses
4 Medical ₹25,000/- ₹1,07,736/- ₹1,07,736/-
expenses (No modification)
5 Damage to ₹5,000/- ₹1,000/- ₹1,000/-
clothing and (No modification)
articles
6 Pain and ₹50,000/- ₹75,000/- ₹75,000/-
suffering (No modification)
7 Loss of ₹25,000/- ₹60,000/- ₹60,000/-
amenities and (No modification)
enjoyment of
life
8 Future treatment ₹50,000/- ₹25,000/- ₹25,000/-
(No modification)
9 Permanent ₹2,50,000/- ₹2,93,760/- 3,67,200/-
disability (₹10,000/-
x12x18x17/100)
10 Loss of earning ₹1,00,000/- -- --
power (No modification)
11 Attendance at -- ₹18,000/- ₹18,000/-
home (No modification)
12 Loss of -- ₹25,000/- ₹25,000/-
marriage (No modification)
prospects
Total ₹6,50,000/- ₹7,71,696/- ₹8,79,136/-
limited to rounded to
₹3,00,000/- ₹7,71,700/-
2025:KER:62175
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹1,07,436/- (total compensation
= ₹8,79,136/-, that is, ₹7,71,700/- granted by the Tribunal +
₹1,07,436/- granted in appeal) with interest at the rate of 8% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of realization (excluding
the period of 143 days delay in filing the appeal) and proportionate
costs. The third 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 petitioner at the earliest in accordance with
law after making deductions, if any.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
SD/-
C.S. SUDHA
JUDGE
ak
