Kerala High Court
Ashraf vs Rubeena Alavi on 6 January, 2025
MACA No. 2302 of 2017
1
2025:KER:5641
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 16TH POUSHA, 1946
MACA NO. 2302 OF 2017
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 30.01.2017 IN OPMV NO.981 OF 2016
OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KOZHIKODE
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 ASHRAF
S/O. MUHAMMED ALI,
2 SAKKINA
W/O. ASHRAF
3 SAJINA
D/O. ASHRAF, ALL ARE RESIDING AT VANKANAKKIL HOUSE, P.O.
PARAMBIL, CHERUVATTA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 012.
4 IRSHANA
W/O. MUHAMMED SHAREEF, RESIDING AT SAFA MARVA, EADTHARA, PARLI
PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD.
BY ADV SRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 RUBEENA ALAVI
W/O. ALAVI, RESIDING AT VIII/569, AJMAL MAHAL,MANNARUKANDY
PARAMBU, KONOTT ROAD, P.O. PARAMBIL, CHERUVATTAKADAVU,
KOZHIKODE - 673 012.
2 AJMAL ALAVI
S/O. ALAVI, RESIDING AT AJMAL MAHAL,MANNARUKANDY PARAMBU,
KONOTT ROAD, P.O. PARAMBIL, CHERUVATTAKADAVU, KOZHIKODE - 673
012.
3 IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
2ND FLOOR, AL RAHABA ARCADE, PUSHPA JUNCTION, KALLAI ROAD,
KOZHIKODE - 673 002.
BY ADV MATHEWS JACOB (SR.)
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
06.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MACA No. 2302 of 2017
2
2025:KER:5641
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J.
------------------------------------
MACA No. 2302 of 2017
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 06th day of January, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in OP(MV) No. 981/2017 on the file of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode are the appellants herein. The
respondents in the OP are the respondents. (For the purpose of convenience,
the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal).
2. The petitioners are the parents and sisters of deceased Rishi
Aqthar who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 15.07.2015.
According to them, on 15.07.2015, at about 2 p.m. car bearing Reg. No. KL-
11-AX-2125 driven by the 2nd respondent along the road from Cheruvatta to
Kozhikode hit against the crane bearing Reg. No. KL-57 F 7988 parked on the
road side and as a result of which the deceased sustained serious injuries and
later on he succumbed to the injuries, while under treatment.
3. The 2nd respondent is the driver, the 1st respondent is the owner
and 3rd respondent is the insurer of the offending vehicle. According to the
them, the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending
vehicle. Therefore, they filed the OP claiming a compensation of Rs.
2025:KER:5641
38,60,000/-.
4. The 1st and 2nd respondents remained ex-parte. The 3rd
respondent/insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy and disputing
the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending car. It was further
contended that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the
offending car.
5. The evidence in the case consists of the documentary evidence
Exts.A1 to A6 and Exts. B1 to B5.
6. After evaluating the evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a
total compensation of Rs. 7,00,000/-.
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.V.M. Salahuddeen, the learned Counsel appearing
for the appellants, and Sri. P. Jacob Mathew., learned Standing Counsel for the
3rd respondent.
10. At the time of the incident, the deceased was aged 19 years. The
incident was on 15.07.2015. The appellants claimed that being a salesman, the
2025:KER:5641
deceased was having a monthly income of Rs.10,000/-. However, they could
not prove the said claim, by adducing evidence. However, the tribunal fixed
his income at Rs. 2,500/-. Therefore, by virtue of the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance
[(2011) 13 SCC 236], his notional income is liable to be fixed, as that of a
coolie, at Rs. 10,000/-.
11. Since he has aged 19 and was a bachelor, 40% of the income is to
be added towards future prospects and 50% is to be deducted towards personal
and living expense and the multiplier to be applied is 18. Therefore, the loss of
dependency will come to Rs.15,12,000/-.
12. Towards funeral expense, the tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/-
while towards pain and suffering Rs.15,000/- was awarded. Another
Rs.1,00,000/- each was awarded towards loss of love and affection and towards
loss of support and care from only son in their old age. Another Rs.50,000/-
was awarded towards loss of companionship and brotherly support for the 3rd
petitioner. In the light of the decision in Pranay Sethi (supra), towards
conventional heads the petitioners can claim only Rs.15,000/- each towards
funeral expense and loss of estate and Rs.40,000/- each by the dependents
towards loss of consortium, with an increase of 10% for every three years.
13. In this case, the petitioners are the parents and elder sisters of the
2025:KER:5641
deceased. Since the petitioners 3 & 4 are the elder sisters of the deceased they
cannot be treated as dependents of the deceased. Therefore, petitioners 1 and 2
alone are entitled to get compensation towards loss of consortium. In the
above circumstances, the petitioners together are entitled to get Rs.18,150/-
each towards loss of estate and funeral expense and petitioners 1 and 2 are
entitled to get Rs.48,400/- each towards loss of consortium.
14. The compensation awarded by the tribunal in excess of the
amount compensation mentioned above will be modified and recalculated. In
other words, compensation awarded on the heads love and affection, loss of
support and care, loss of companionship etc. will be deleted. Towards pain and
suffering the tribunal has awarded only Rs.15,000/-, which is liable to be
enhanced Rs.35,000/-.
15. No change is required, in the amounts awarded on other heads, as
the compensation awarded on those heads appears to be just and reasonable.
16. Therefore, the petitioner/ appellant is entitled to get a total
compensation of Rs.16,66,950/- (Rupees Sixteen lakh sixty six thousand nine
hundred and fifty Only), as modified and recalculated above and given in the
table below, for easy reference.
Sl. No. Head of claim Amount awarded by the The amount given in
Tribunal(Rs) appeal (Rs.)
1 Transport to hospital 5,000/- 5,000/-
2 Funeral Expenses 25,000/- 18,150/-
2025:KER:5641
3 Pain & suffering of the deceased 15,000/- 35,000/-
4 Loss of love and affection 1,00,000/- Nil
5 Loss of care and support in their old age 1,00,000/- Nil
being their only son
6 Loss of brotherly support 50,000/- Nil
7 Loss of Consortium Nil 96,800/-
8 Loss of dependency 4,05,000/- 15,12,000/-
Total 7,00,000/- 16,66,950/-
Amount enhanced 9,66,950/-
17. In the result, this Appeal is allowed in part, and the 3 rd respondent
is directed to deposit a total compensation of Rs. 16,66,950/- (Rupees Sixteen
lakh sixty six thousand nine hundred and fifty Only), less the amount already
deposited, if any, along with interest @ 8% per annum, from the date of the
petition till realisation, with proportionate costs, within a period of two months
from today.
18. 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 and as per rules.
Sd/-
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
JUDGE
sjb/06-01-25
