Kerala High Court
Shaiju V.V vs Arjun .N.P on 22 August, 2025
2025:KER:63788
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 31ST SRAVANA, 1947
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 22.10.2019 IN OPMV NO.904 OF
2016 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SHAIJU V.V
AGED 1 YEARS
S/O VELAYUDHAN, VENGACHUVATTIL HOUSE, CHENGARA,
PATTIMATTOM.P.O, ERNAKULAM-683562.
BY ADV SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 ARJUN N.P.
S/O.PADMANABHAN, NEDUVANTHANATHU,
MAZHUVANNOOR.P.O, VALAMBOOR, ERNAKULAM-686032.
2 THE MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD, KOTTAYAM BRANCH,
KOTTAYAM-686001.
BY ADV SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 22.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
2
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No.481 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of August 2025
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) by the claim petitioner in O.P.(MV)
No.904/2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Kottayam, (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of compensation
granted by Award dated 22/10/2019. The respondents herein are
respondents 1 and 2 respectively in the petition. In this appeal, the
parties and documents will be referred to as described in the
original petition.
2. According to the claim petitioner, on 09/12/2015 at
01:30 p.m., while he was travelling in car bearing registration
no.KL-40/D 117 driven by the first respondent through the Muttam-
Thodupuzha road and when he reached near Malankara estate gate,
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
due to the rash and negligent driving of the latter, the car hit on a
tree, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries. A sum of
₹10,00,000/- was claimed as compensation under various heads.
3. The first respondent/owner-cum-driver of the offending
vehicle filed written statement denying negligence on his part.
4. The second respondent/insurer filed written statement
admitting the existence of a valid policy in respect of the offending
vehicle. The age, occupation and income of the claim petitioner
were disputed. It was also contended that the compensation claimed
was quite excessive.
5. Before the Tribunal, PW1 was examined and Exts.A1 to
A14 and Ext.X1 were marked on the side of the claim petitioner.
No evidence was adduced by the second respondent/insurer.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the oral and
documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the first respondent/owner-cum-driver of
the offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
an amount of ₹6,73,240/- together with interest @ 9% per annum
from the date of the petition till realisation along with proportionate
costs. Aggrieved by the Award, 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 36-year-old computer technician, was earning
₹15,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal fixed the notional
income at ₹7,000/- which is quite low and hence the same needs to
be enhanced. The claim petitioner refers to Exts.A9 and A10
certificates to prove his qualifications. Per contra, it is submitted by
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
the learned counsel for the second respondent/insurer that in the
absence of any materials to prove either the avocation or income,
the Tribunal was right in fixing the notional income at ₹7,000/- and
that it suffers from no infirmity. However, he submits that in case
the Court is inclined to enhance the notional income, the same may
be fixed as per the dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal
Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236.
9.1. Going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa (Supra), the
income of a coolie in the year 2015 is liable to be fixed at ₹10,000/-
per month. In the case on hand, Exts.A9 and A10 certificates show
the educational qualifications of the claim petitioner. Therefore, in
the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that fixing the
notional income of the claim petitioner at ₹12,000/- per month
would be just and reasonable.
Bystander expensens
10. Though an amount ₹30,000/- was claimed, the Tribunal
granted an amount ₹6,500/-. The accident took place on
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
09/12/2015. Hence, I find that the claim petitioner can be awarded
bystander expense at the rate of ₹400/- per day for a period of 26
days for which period he was hospitalized.
11. The impugned Award is modified to the following
extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
(in ₹) Tribunal (in ₹)
(in ₹)
1. Loss of earning 45,000/- 84,000/- 1,44,000/-
(7,000 x 12) (12,000 x 12)
2. Loss of earning - Nil Nil
(partial) (No Modification)
3. Medical and 25,000/- 5,680/- 5,680/-
miscellaneous (No Modification)
expenses
4. Bystander expenses 30,000/- 6,500/- 10,400/-
(400 x 26)
5. Transportation 10,000/- 20,000/- 20,000/-
expenses (No Modification)
6. Extra nourishment 5,000/- 5,500/- 5,500/-
(No Modification)
7. Damage to clothing 2,000/- 1,000/- 1,000/-
etc (No Modification)
8. Pain and suffering 2,00,000/- 1,25,000/- 1,25,000/-
(No Modification)
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
9. Loss/reduction of 5,00,000/- 3,85,560/- 6,60,960/-
earning capacity (7,000x12x (12,000x12x
15x30.6/100) 15x30.6/100)
10. Loss of amenities 2,00,000/- 40,000/- 40,000/-
and conveniences (No Modification)
Total 10,17,000/- 6,73,240/- 10,12,540/-
limited to
10,00,000/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹3,39,300/- (total
compensation = ₹10,12,540/- that is, ₹6,73,240/- granted by the
Tribunal plus ₹3,39,300/- 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 120 days delay in filing the appeal) and
proportionate costs. The second respondent/insurer is directed to
deposit the aforesaid amount before the Tribunal within a period of
60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. On
deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the
claim petitioner at the earliest in accordance with law after making
deductions, if any.
2025:KER:63788
MACA NO. 481 OF 2020
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
NP
