Kerala High Court
Universal Sompo General Insurance ... vs Kanniammal on 5 June, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.296 of 2020
1
2025:KER:39724
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1947
MACA NO. 296 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 20.05.2019 IN OPMV NO.2032 OF
2016 ON THE FILE OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM.
APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:
UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
CENTRAL ARCADE, AZAD ROAD,
NORTH END, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.
BY ADVS.
DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY
SRI.JITHIN SAJI ISAAC
RESPONDENTS/PETITONERS & 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS:
1 KANNIAMMAL,
AGED 43 YEARS,
W/O.LATE R.RAJU, 10/4 SOODAMANIPATTY,
KULATHUR VILLAGE, VEDASANDUR,
DINDIGUL, TAMILNADU - 624 005.
2 RANJITHA,
AGED 26 YEARS,
D/O.LATE R.RAJU,
10/4-SOODAMANIPATTY,
KULATHUR VILLAGE, VEDASANDUR,
DINDIGUL, TAMILNADU - 624005.
M.A.C.A.No.296 of 2020
2
2025:KER:39724
3 SARAVANA KUMAR,
AGED 26 YEARS,
D/O.LATE R.RAJU,
10/4-SOODAMANIPATTY, KULATHUR VILLAGE,
VEDASANDUR, DINDIGUL, TAMILNADU - 624 005.
4 VINITHA GULECHHA,
B-4 KRISHNA MANASI PARTMENTS,
NO.97, GANDHI NAGAR, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
CHENNAI, TAMILNADU - 600 020.
5 SOURABH GULECHHA,
B-4, KRISHNA MANASI APARTMENTS, NO.97,
GANDHI NAGAR, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
CHENNAI, TAMILNADU - 600 020.
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 05.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A.No.296 of 2020
3
2025:KER:39724
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.296 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of June 2025
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) by the 3 rd respondent/insurer
in O.P.(MV) No.2032/2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the
amount of compensation granted by Award dated 20/05/2019.
The respondents herein are the claimants and respondents 1 and 2
respectively 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, daughter and
son of deceased Raju. According to the claim petitioners, on
22/01/2016 at 11:30 p.m., while the deceased was crossing Pandit
Karuppan road in front of M.M.Medicals, Mattammel, Thevara,
2025:KER:39724
car bearing registration no. TN-07/BY 6757 driven by the 2nd
respondent in a rash and negligent manner and in high speed,
knocked him down. Immediately after the incident he was taken
to the Medical trust hospital, Ernakulam. But he succumbed to the
injuries sustained on his head and chest.
3. The first respondent, the owner of the offending
car and the second respondent-driver remained ex parte.
4. The 3rd respondent/insurer filed written
statement admitting the existence of a valid policy in respect of
the offending vehicle. It was contended that there was no
negligence on the part of the second respondent and that the
accident was due to the negligence of the deceased. The age,
occupation and income of the deceased shown in the petition were
disputed. It was also contended that the compensation claimed
was quite excessive.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was
adduced by either side. Exts.A1 to A13 were marked on the side
2025:KER:39724
of the claim petitioners. No documentary evidence was adduced
by the 3rd respondent.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the
documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the 2nd respondent-driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded an
amount of ₹9,30,750/- together with interest @ 9% per annum
from the date of the petition till realisation along with
proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award, the 3rd
respondent/insurer 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. Though notice was served on the 1st and 2nd
respondents, they did not appear either in person or through
counsel. Heard the learned counsel for the third
respondent/insurer.
2025:KER:39724
9. The Award is challenged by the third
respondent/insurer on the following grounds :-
Notional Income
The learned counsel for the third respondent/insurer
submitted that even going by the pleadings, the deceased was a
labourer who was earning wages at the rate of ₹7,00/- per day.
No evidence was adduced to substantiate the said contention.
However, the Tribunal fixed the notional income at ₹12,000/- per
month, which is against the dictum in Ramachandrappa v.
Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd,
(2011) 13 SCC 236. Therefore, he submits that the notional
income may be fixed as per the dictum in Ramachandrappa
(Supra).
The notional income of a coolie in the year 2016 is liable
to be fixed at ₹10,500/-. That being the position, the notional
income of the deceased is fixed at ₹10,500/-.
10. The impugned Award is modified to the
2025:KER:39724
following extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No Claimed Awarded by appeal
. Tribunal
1. Transport to ₹25,000/- ₹10,000/- ₹10,000/-
hospital and (No
modification)
back to home
2. Medical ₹2,10,000/- ₹1,96,750/- ₹1,96,750/-
expenses
(No
modification)
3. Funeral ₹50,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
expenses
(No
modification)
cloth and (No
modification)
articles
5 Compensation ₹50,000/- ₹50,000/- ₹50,000/-
for pan and (No
modification)
suffering
6. Compensation ₹2,00,000/- ₹1,00,000/- ₹1,00,000/-
for loss of love (No
modification)
and affection
7. Loss of estate ₹50,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
(No
modification)
8. Compensation ₹9,24,000/- ₹50,4000/- ₹4,41,000/-
for the loss of (10,500/- x ½ x
12 x 17)
dependency
prospects (No
modification)
2025:KER:39724
expenses (No
modification)
11. Loss of ₹1,00,000 ₹40,000/- ₹40,000/-
consortium (No
modification)
Total ₹17,52,600/- ₹9,30,750/- ₹8,67,750/-
Claim limited
₹17,00,000/-
to
In the result, the appeal is allowed by deducting the
compensation awarded by an amount of ₹63,000/- (that is,
₹9,30,750/- granted by the Tribunal minus ₹8,67,750/- granted in
appeal).
The appeal is allowed to the above extent.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
Jms
