Kerala High Court
Sarath K.R vs Ramadasan on 23 June, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.836 of 2020
1
2025:KER:45221
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1947
MACA NO. 836 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 31.01.2020 IN OPMV NO.1044 OF
2018 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KOZHIKODE.
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SARATH K.R.
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O.RAJU.K.K.,
KUNNUPURATH HOSUE,
KUNITHALA, PERAVOOR P.O.,
MANATHANA, MELMURINGODI,
KANNUR DISTRICT-670 673.
BY ADV SHRI.ANIL KUMAR K.P.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 RAMADASAN
S/O.KANDAKKUTTI,
KEEVUMADATHIL HOUSE,
PERUVAYAL,
PANTHEERANKAVU P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 019.
2 VIPINDAS.K.M.,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O.RAMADASAN.K.M.,
KEEZHUMADATHIL HOUSE,
PANTHEERANKAVU P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 019.
M.A.C.A.No.836 of 2020
2
2025:KER:45221
3 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER/AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
SHAFEER COMPLEX, OPP.YMCA,
KANNUR ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 001.
BY ADV SRI.A.C.DEVY
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 23.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A.No.836 of 2020
3
2025:KER:45221
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.836 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd 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.1044/2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal, Kozhikode (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the
amount of compensation granted by Award dated 31/01/2020.
The respondents herein are the respondents 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
24/11/2017 at about 8:50 a.m., while he was travelling in bus
bearing registration no.KL-11-X-1499 from Perumanna to
Kozhikode and when reached the place by name, Kottoli junction,
the rear tyre of the bus blasted due to the reckless driving of the
second respondent-driver by which the platform of the bus got
2025:KER:45221
damaged, causing grievous injuries him.
3. The first respondent-owner and the second
respondent-driver filed written statements denying negligence on
the part of the latter.
4. The third respondent/insurer filed written
statement admitting the policy, but denying negligence on the part
of the second respondent. The averments in the petition regarding
age, occupation and monthly income were disputed. Amount
claimed under various heads was contended to be exorbitant.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was
adduced by either side. Exts.A1 to A10 were marked on the side
of the claim petitioner. 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
offending bus resulting in the incident and hence awarded an
amount of ₹1,95,600/- together with interest @ 8% per annum
from the date of the petition till realisation along with
2025:KER:45221
proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award, the claim petitioner
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. Heard both sides
9. 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 student cum caterer aged 22 years was
earning ₹25,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal fixed the
annual notional income at ₹1,00,000/-, which comes to ₹8,333/-
per month, which going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa v.
Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd,
(2011) 13 SCC 236 is quite low. Therefore, it needs to be
appropriately enhanced.
9.1. Going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa
(Supra), the notional income is fixed at ₹11,000/- per month.
2025:KER:45221
Loss of earnings
10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
claim petitioner that in the light of the injuries sustained, he was
also entitled to compensation towards loss of earnings. However,
no amount has been granted and therefore, reasonable
compensation may be granted under the said head also.
10.1. The materials on record show that the following
are injuries sustained by the claim petitioner-
"fracture bilateral calcaneun extra articular and
tenderness over both calcaneum."
He was hospitalised for a period of 3 days. The disability has
been assessed as 8%. Therefore, I find that loss of earnings for a
period of 3 months would be reasonable. (₹11,000/- x 3=
₹33,000/-)
11. The impugned Award is modified to the
following extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
Tribunal
(in ₹) (in ₹) (in ₹)
1. Loss of earning 1,50,000/- 1,44,000/- 1,90,080/-
power (1,32,000/- x 18 x
8/100)
2025:KER:45221
2. Medical bills 50,000/- 2,500/- 2,500/-
(No modification)
3. Bystander's 10,000/- 2,100/- 2,100/-
expenses (No modification)
4. Pain and 1,00,000/- 20,000/- 20,000/-
sufferings (No modification)
5. Loss of 1,00,000/- 20,000/- 20,000/-
amenities and (No modification)
enjoyment in
life
6. Transport to 10,000/- 5,000/- 5,000/-
hospital (No modification)
7. Extra 5,000/- 2,000/- 2,000/-
nourishment (No modification)
8. Loss of earning - - 33,000/-
(11,000/- x 3)
Total Limited to 1,95,600/- 2,74,680/-
5,00,000/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹79,080/- (total
compensation ₹2,74,680/- that is, ₹1,95,600/- granted by the
Tribunal + ₹79,080/- granted in appeal) with interest at the rate of
8% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization
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
2025:KER:45221
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
