Kerala High Court
Ammini Amma vs Madhu on 4 February, 2025
2025:KER:9642
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 15TH MAGHA, 1946
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 24.02.2015 IN OPMV NO.877 OF 2010 OF
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS :-
1 AMMINI AMMA, W/O. LATE NARAYANAN NAIR,
KOLLERI HOUSE, VATTANATHRA P.O., AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2 GEETHA P., W/O. LATE SASI KUMAR, KOLLERI HOUSE,
VATTANATHRA P.O., AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
3 SARATH P., S/O. LATE SASIKUMAR, KOLLERI HOUSE,
VATTANATHRA P.O., AMBALLUR VILLAGE,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 :-
1 MADHU, S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, KOLLERI HOUSE,
VATTANATHRA P.O., AMBALLUR VILLAGE-680 302,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2 THE MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
KOODALI ARCADE,AMBALLUR-682 315.
BY ADV SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 04.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
2
2025:KER:9642
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in O.P.(M.V.) No.877/ 2010 on the file of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, is the appellants herein. (For the
purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank
before the Tribunal).
2. The O.P. was filed under under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, by the mother, wife and son of the deceased by name Sasikumar,
who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 30.01.2010. According
to them, on 30.01.2010 at about 08.15 pm, while the deceased was riding
pillion on a motorcycle bearing Registration No.KL-45/B-7205 ridden by the
1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, the motorcycle hit against a
metal heap, and consequently the motorcycle capsized and he sustained serious
injuries and he succumbed to the injuries on 05.02.2010.
3. The 2nd respondent is the owner and 3rd respondent is the insurer
of the offending vehicle.
4. The insurance company filed a written statement, admitting the
accident as well as policy, but disputing the negligence on the part of the driver
of the offending vehicle.
5. The evidence in the case consists of the oral testimonies of Pws 1
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
2025:KER:9642
and 2 and documentary evidence Exts.A1 to A9 were marked on the side of
the petitioner. No evidence was adduced by the respondents.
6. After evaluating the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a
total compensation of Rs.8,25,770/-.
7. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal, the petitioners preferred this appeal.
8. Now the point that arises for consideration is the following:
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just
and reasonable.
9. Heard Sri.A.N.Santhosh, the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners/appellants, Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, the learned Standing
Counsel for the 3rd respondent.
10. The Point: One of the contentions raised by the learned counsel
for the petitioners is regarding the income of the deceased as fixed by the
Tribunal. According to them, the deceased was working as a Supervisor in
Kajah Company getting a monthly income of Rs.9,000/- per month. In order to
prove the same, they examined PW2, who is the employer of the deceased. He
deposed that the deceased was working in this company and getting a monthly
salary of Rs.8,400/-. Ext.A7 is the salary certificate produced by them in that
respect. However, the Tribunal refused to accept Ext.A7 on the ground that the
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
2025:KER:9642
consolidated pay was mentioned in Ext.A7 instead of split details. The reason
given by the Tribunal for rejecting Ext.A7 is untenable. In the light of evidence
of PW2 and Ext.A17, I am inclined to accept the monthly income of the
deceased as Rs.8,400/-.
11. On the date of accident, the deceased was aged 47 years.
Therefore, 25% of the monthly income is liable to be added towards future
prospects, as held in the decision in National Insurance Co.Ltd v Pranay
Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680] and the multiplier to be applied is 13, as held in
Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121. Since the
deceased was married who left behind 3 dependants, towards personal and
living expense, 1/3 of the income is liable to be deducted, as held in Sarla
Verma (supra). In the above circumstances, the loss of dependency will come
to Rs.10,92,000/-.
12. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.30,000/- towards loss of estate,
Rs.23,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of
consortium. In the light of the decision in Pranay Sethi (supra), the appellants
are entitled to get a consolidated sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate,
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, and each dependent is entitled to get a
sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of consortium, with an increase of 10%
in every three years. Therefore, towards loss of estate and funeral expense they
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
2025:KER:9642
are entitled to get a sum of Rs.18,150/- each. Towards loss of consortium,
petitioners are entitled to get a sum of Rs.1,45,200/- (48,400 x 3).
13. Towards the head 'pain and sufferings', the Tribunal has
awarded Rs.10,000/-, which according to the learned counsel for the
petitioners, is on the lower side. The deceased died in this case 6 days after the
accident. In the above circumstances, I hold that the compensation awarded
towards pain and suffering is on the lower side, and hence, it is enhanced to
Rs.30,000/-.
14. No change is required, in the amounts awarded on other heads,
as the compensation awarded on those heads appears to be just and reasonable.
15. Therefore, the petitioners/ appellants are entitled to get a total
compensation of Rs.14,25,470/-, as modified and recalculated above and given
in the table below, for easy reference.
Sl.
No. Head of Claim Amount awarded by Amount Awarded
Tribunal in Appeal
(in Rs.) (in Rs.)
1 Transport to hospital 3000 3000
4 Medical expensses 1,17,970 1,17,970
MACA NO. 1603 OF 2015
2025:KER:9642
5 Funeral expenses 23000 18150
6 Pain and suffering 10,000 30,000
7 Loss of dependeny 5,40,800 10,92,000
8 Loss of estate 30,000 18150
9 Loss of consortium 1,00,000 1,45,200
Total 8,25,770 14,25,470
Amount enhanced/ 5,99,700
reduced
16. In the result, this Appeal is allowed in part, and the 2nd
respondent is directed to deposit a total sum of Rs.14,25,470/- (Rupees
Fourteen Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Seventy Only), less
the amount already deposited, if any, along with interest @ 8% per annum from
the date of the petition till realisation/deposit, with proportionate costs, within a
period of two months from today.
17. On depositing the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal shall disburse
the entire amount to the petitioners, in the ratio fixed by the Tribunal, excluding
court fee payable, if any, without delay, as per rules.
Sd/-
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR,
JUDGE
SMA.
