Kerala High Court
Balakrishnan vs The New India Assurance Company Ltd on 17 June, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.1067 of 2020
1
2025:KER:43018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1947
MACA NO. 1067 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 01.10.2019 IN OPMV NO.1701 OF
2016 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
BALAKRISHNAN,
AGED 66 YEARS,
S/O. KUMARAN, KARIKULAM HOUSE,
NEAR JUNCTION, KURUMASSERY P.O.
BY ADV SHRI.A.N.SANTHOSH
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
2ND FLOOR, JRJ COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD,
OTTAPALAM-679 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
BY ADV SHRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 17.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A.No.1067 of 2020
2
2025:KER:43018
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.1067 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of June 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.1701/2016 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the
amount of compensation granted by Award dated 01/10/2019.
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. According to the claim petitioner, on
20/08/2016 at about 03:45 p.m., while he was riding motorcycle
bearing registration no.KL-41-B-7041 through Angamaly-
Chalakudy road and when reached the place by name
Kothakulangara, car bearing registration no.KL-07-BL-456
2025:KER:43018
driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner
knocked him down, as a result of which he sustained grievous
injuries.
3. The first respondent-owner remained ex parte.
4. The second respondent-driver filed written
statement admitting the accident but denying negligence on his
part. Compensation claimed under various heads was also
challenged.
5. The third respondent/insurer filed written
statement admitting the policy, but disputing negligence on the
part of the second respondent. The amount of compensation
claimed was contended to be excessive.
6. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was
adduced by either side. Exts.A19 to A22 and Ext.C2 were marked
on the side of the claim petitioner. No documentary evidence was
adduced by the respondents.
7. 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:43018
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded an
amount of ₹2,93,652/- together with interest at the rate of 8% 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.
8. 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.
9. Heard both sides
10. The award of compensation by the Tribunal
under the following heads are challenged by the claim petitioner-
Notional income
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim
petitioner that the latter, a 62 year old man was an agriculturist
earning ₹30,000/- per month. The Tribunal fixed the notional
income at ₹9,000/- only, which is quite low even going by the
dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram
Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236.
As pointed out by the learned counsel for the third
2025:KER:43018
respondent/insurer, there is no evidence either oral or
documentary to substantiate the allegation that the claim
petitioner was an agriculturist earning ₹30,000/- per month.
However, going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa (Supra) the
notional income can be fixed at ₹10,500/-, which would be just
and reasonable.
Loss of earnings
The materials on record show that the following are the
injuries sustained by the claim petitioner -
• Mild periorbital edema.
• Multiple abrasions over right zygoma region.
• Laceration over philtrum region and upper labial
mucosa.
• Mild step deformity in relation to right infra
orbital rim.
In the light of the nature of injuries sustained to the claim
petitioner, he probably may have been unable to work for a period
of 4 months. Hence, compensation for loss of earnings would be
₹10,500 x 4 = ₹42,000/-.
11. The impugned Award is modified to the
2025:KER:43018
following extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
Tribunal
1. Loss of ₹5,00,000/- ₹27,000/- ₹42,000/-
earnings (₹10,500/- x 4)
2. Partial loss of ₹1,00,000/- Nil Nil
earnings (No modification)
3. Transport to ₹1,00,000/- ₹3,500/- ₹3,500/-
hospital (No modification)
4. Extra ₹1,00,000/- ₹3,500/- ₹3,500/-
nourishment (No modification)
5. Medical ₹3,00,000/- ₹49,140/- ₹49,140/-
expenses (No modification)
6. Pain and ₹3,00,000/- ₹60,000/- ₹60,000/-
suffering (No modification)
7. Loss of ₹3,00,000/- ₹50,000/- ₹50,000/-
amenities etc. (No modification)
8. Permanent ₹3,00,000/- ₹96,012/- ₹1,12,014/-
disability (₹10,500/- x 12 x 7
x 12.7%)
9. Attendance ₹2,00,000/- ₹3,500/- ₹3,500/-
charge (No modification)
10. Damage to ₹1,00,000/- ₹1,000/- ₹1,000/-
clothes etc (No modification)
11. Future ₹1,00,000/- Nil Nil
prospects (No modification)
12. Loss of ₹1,00,000/- Nil Nil
earning power (No modification)
13. Disfiguration ₹1,00,000/- Nil Nil
(No modification)
Total ₹26,00,000/- ₹2,93,652/- ₹3,24,654/-
Limited to
₹5,00,000/-
2025:KER:43018
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹31,002/- (total
compensation ₹3,24,654/- that is, ₹2,93,652/- granted by the
Tribunal + ₹31,002/- 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 129 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 petitioner at the earliest in
accordance with law after making deductions, if any.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
Jms
