Kerala High Court
Abdul Salam vs Fazil Mon on 10 September, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.1205 of 2020
1
2025:KER:67311
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 19TH BHADRA,
1947
MACA NO. 1205 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 18/07/2019 IN OPMV NO.679 OF
2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
ALAPPUZHA.
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
ABDUL SALAM
AGED 32 YEARS,
S/O. ABDUL KAREEM, NISKAR NIVAS,
KIZHAKKEY THAIVELIKAKOM,
VALIYAKULAM, VATTAYAL WARD,
HEAD P.O. ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
SRI.A.R.DILEEP
SRI.P.J.JOE PAUL
SRI.MANU SRINATH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 FAZIL MON
S/O. BASHEER, VRIKSHAVILASOM THOPPU,
WARD II, AMBALAPPUZHA NORTH 688 001.
2 RASHEED,
S/O. MAMMU, 798, PALLIVELI,
WARD NO. 10, PUNNAPRA,
ALAPPUZHA 688 004.
M.A.C.A.No.1205 of 2020
2
2025:KER:67311
3 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
ALAPPUZHA 688 001.
BY ADV SMT.DEEPA GEORGE
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 10.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A.No.1205 of 2020
3
2025:KER:67311
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.1205 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of September 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.679/2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Alappuzha (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of
compensation granted by Award dated 18/07/2019. 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
19/02/2012 at about 09:00 a.m., while the petitioner was riding
motorcycle through National Highway, private bus bearing
registration no.KL-07/BB-4233 driven by the first respondent in
2025:KER:67311
a rash and negligent manner knocked him down, as a result of
which he sustained grievous injuries.
3. The first respondent-driver and the second
respondent-owner of the offending vehicle remained ex-parte.
4. The third respondent-insurer filed written
statement admitting the policy but denying negligence on the part
of the first respondent. The averments in the petition regarding
age, occupation and monthly income of the claim petitioner were
disputed. The compensation claimed under various heads was
contended to be exorbitant.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was
adduced by either side. Exts.A1 to A12 and Exts.X1 and X2 were
marked on the side of the claim petitioner. No documentary
evidence was produced by the respondents.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the
documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, found
negligence on the part of the first respondent-driver of the
offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded an
2025:KER:67311
amount of ₹1,66,477/- together with interest @ 9% 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.
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 is challenged by the claim petitioner-
Notional income
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim
petitioner that the latter, a 24 year old aluminum fabricator was
earning ₹9,000/- per month. But the Tribunal fixed the notional
income at ₹6,000/- per month, which is quite low going by the
dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram
Alliance Insurance Company Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236. He also
draws my attention to Exts.A9 to A11 which will prove the
2025:KER:67311
avocation of the claim petitioner. Per contra, it is submitted by
the learned counsel for the third respondent/insurer that in the
absence of any evidence relating to income, the Tribunal was
justified in fixing the notional income at ₹6,000/- and therefore,
no infirmity has been committed by the Tribunal.
9.1. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the
claim petitioner, Exts.A9 to A11 prove the avocation of the claim
petitioner. Going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa (Supra),
the income of a coolie in the year 2012 is liable to be fixed at
₹8,500/-. ₹9,000/- has been claimed as his monthly income by
the claim petitioner. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of
the case, I find that fixing the notional income at ₹9,000/- as
claimed by the claim petitioner would be just and reasonable.
Pain and suffering
10. The materials on record show that the claim
petitioner sustained the following injuries-
"1. Fracture clavicle right.
2. Lacerated wound 3 x 1 x 1 cm over Rt side of lip.
2025:KER:67311
3. Lacerated wound 1 x 1 x 1 cm inner side of upper lip.
4. Lacerated wound 4 x 1 x 0.5 cm over icm lateral to RE."
He was hospitalised for a period of four days. Therefore, an
amount of ₹20,000/- as claimed would be just and reasonable
under this head.
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 18,000/- 18,000/- 27,000/-
earnings for (9,000/- x 3)
three months
2. Transport to 1,500/- 1,500/- 1,500/-
hospital (No modification)
3. Expenses for 5,000/- 3,297/- 3,297/-
treatment and (No modification)
medicine
4. Damage to 1,000/- 1,000/- 1,000/-
clothing and (No modification)
articles
5. Extra - 1,000/- 1,000/- 1,000/-
nourishment (No modification)
6. Expenses for 2,000/- 2,000/- 2,000/-
bystander (No modification)
7. Compensation 20,000/- 18,000/- 20,000/-
for pain and
sufferings
2025:KER:67311
8. Compensation 30,000/- 1,03,680/- 1,55,520/-
for permanent (9,000/- x 12 x 18 x
disability and 8/100)
consequential
loss of earning
power
9. Compensation 10,000/- 18,000/- 18,000/-
for loss of (No modification)
amenities of
life
Total 88,500/- 1,66,477/- 2,29,317/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹62,840/- (total
compensation = ₹2,29,317/- that is, ₹1,66,477/- granted by the
Tribunal + ₹62,840/- 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/ insurer 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. The additional court fee,
if any, shall be paid.
2025:KER:67311
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
Jms
