Kerala High Court
Dhanalakshmi vs National Insurance Company Ltd on 5 June, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.453 of 2020
1
2025:KER:39902
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. 453 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED IN OPMV NO.111 OF 2018 ON THE
FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 DHANALAKSHMI,
AGED 46 YEARS,
W/O. MURUKESAN, 8/407,
P. N. CHALLA, EDUPPUKULAM,
ELAPULLY P. O., MENONPARA,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 556.
2 MURUKESAN
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O. CHINNASWAMY MUTHALI,
P. N. CHALLA, EDUPPUKULAM,
ELAPULLY P. O.,
MENONPARA,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 556.
3 ANEESHKUMAR
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O. MURUKESAN,
P. N. CHALLA,
EDUPPUKULAM,
ELAPULLY P. O.,
MENONPARA,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 556.
BY ADV SRI.BABY MATHEW
M.A.C.A.No.453 of 2020
2
2025:KER:39902
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, 3RD FLOOR,
EAST FORT RESORT, FORT MAIDAN,
KUNNATHURMEDU P .O., PALAGHAT - 678 013.
INSURER OF EICHER LORRY K L-45-P-6811,
POLICY NO.5710002/31/17/6300002187,
VALID FROM 27.05.2017 TO 26.05.2018.
BY ADV SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN
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.453 of 2020
3
2025:KER:39902
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.453 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 claim petitioners in
O.P.(MV) No.111/2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Palakkad (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of
compensation granted by Award dated 25/09/2019. The sole
respondent herein is the 3rd respondent 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 parents and
brother of deceased Arumughan. According to the claim
petitioners, on 25/10/2017 at about 08:30 a.m., while the deceased
was riding a motorcycle through Almaram - Menonpara public
2025:KER:39902
road, lorry bearing registration no.KL-45 P-6811 driven by the
second respondent knocked him down causing grievous injuries
to which he succumbed.
3. The first respondent owner and the second
respondent driver remained ex parte.
4. The third respondent/insurer filed written
statement admitting the policy and disputing the negligence on
the part of the second respondent. The age, occupation and
monthly income of the deceased were disputed. The amount of
compensation claimed was contended to be excessive.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was
adduced by either side. Exts.A1 to A12 were marked on the side
of the claim petitioners. No documentary evidence was adduced
by the respondents.
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
2025:KER:39902
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded an
amount of ₹13,89,600/- together with interest @ 7.5% per annum
from the date of the petition till realisation along with
proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award, the claim
petitioners have 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 are challenged by the claim petitioners-
Notional income
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim
petitioners that a mistake occurred in drafting the claim petition,
in which the deceased was stated to be a construction worker
earning ₹15,000/- per month. Actually, he was a qualified
Draftsman Civil, who had successfully completed Vocational
2025:KER:39902
Training Course in 2017 from the Hindustan Institute of
Technology Private Industrial Training, Palakkad. However, this
fact was omitted to be pleaded in the petition. I.A.No.1 of 2025
has been filed for receiving Annexure-A1, which is the National
Trade Certificate issued to the deceased by the National Council
for Vocational Training.
It is submitted by the third respondent/insurer that
Annexure -A1 was never produced before the Tribunal and the
pleadings was also not in consonance with Annexure-A1. That
being the position, there is no infirmity calling for an interference
by this Court, goes the argument.
The specific pleadings in the petition is that the deceased
was a construction worker earning about ₹15,000/- per month.
Even going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager,
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC
236, the notional income of even a coolie was liable to be fixed at
the rate of ₹11,000/- per month. That being the position, I find
2025:KER:39902
that an amount of ₹12,000/- would be just and reasonable to be
fixed as the notional income.
The learned counsel for the claim petitioners also
submitted that the compensation that has been awarded under the
other heads by the Tribunal is also low and that it requires to be
enhanced. However, on going through the impugned Award, I do
not find any reasons for interference.
10. The impugned Award is modified to the
following extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
Tribunal
1. Transport to ₹10,000/- ₹5,000/- ₹5,000/-
hospital (No modification)
2. Funeral ₹25,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
expenses (No modification)
3. Compensation ₹1,00,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
for loss of (No modification)
estate
4. Filial Nil ₹80,000/- ₹80,000/-
consortium to (No modification)
P1 and P2
5. Compensation ₹25,000/- ₹15,000/- ₹15,000/-
for pain and (No modification)
suffering
2025:KER:39902
6. Loss of love ₹3,00,000/- ₹50,000/- ₹50,000/-
and affection (No modification)
7. Compensation ₹20,00,000/- ₹12,09,600/- ₹18,14,400/-
for loss of [12000 + (12000
dependency x 40%) x 12 x 18
x 50/100]
Total ₹13,89,600/- ₹19,94,400/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹6,04,800/- (total
compensation ₹19,94,400/- that is, ₹13,89,600/- granted by the
Tribunal +₹6,04,800/- 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 74 days delay in filing the appeal) and
proportionate costs. The third respondent/insurance company 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 petitioners at the earliest in
accordance with law after making deductions, if any.
2025:KER:39902
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
Jms
2025:KER:39902
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 NATIONAL TRADE CERTIFICATE DATED
12/01/2018 ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL
COUNCIL FOR VOCATIONAL TRAINING,
MINISTRY OF SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIPS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
