Kerala High Court
Binu Mathew vs Lalu on 11 September, 2025
2025:KER:67779
MACA No.3179/2014
..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 20TH BHADRA, 1947
MACA NO. 3179 OF 2014
OPMV NO.434 OF 2010 OF ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
THODUPUZHA
APPELLANT/CLAIMANT:
BINU MATHEW, AGED 26 YEARS
VADAKKEDATHU PUTHAN PURAKAL HOUSE, MURUKKADY KARA
KURIAN COLONY BHAGAM, KUMALY VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SACHITHANANDA PAI
SMT.K.R.CHITHRA
KUM.P.M.VIDYA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 LALU
AGED 31 YEARS
LALU MANDIRAM(H), MURUKKADY P.O, KURIAN COLONY 40 ACRE
BHAGAM, KUMALY VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
2 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY
MUVATTUPUZHA BRANCH, MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX
KACHERITHAZHAM, MUVATTUPUZHA.
BY ADV SHRI.M.HARISHARMA
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 11.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:67779
MACA No.3179/2014
..2..
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimant in OP(MV) No.434 of
2010 on the files of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Thodupuzha. The respondents herein were the respondents before the
tribunal.
2. The case of the appellant/claimant is that on
14.04.2010, while he was travelling in an autorickshaw bearing
Reg.No.KL-37-8858 driven by the first respondent in a rash and
negligent manner, the autorickshaw overturned, whereby he sustained
serious injuries. He approached the tribunal claiming a total
compensation of ₹60,000/-.
3. The first respondent/owner-cum-driver of the
autorickshaw remained ex parte before the tribunal. The second
respondent insurer filed a written statement, admitting the policy
coverage for the offending vehicle, but disputing the liability and
quantum of compensation claimed. Exts.A1 to A8 & B1 were marked.
The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, held
that the accident took place on account of the negligence of the driver
of the offending vehicle and awarded a sum of ₹27,650/- as
2025:KER:67779
..3..
compensation under different heads with interest @ 8% per annum from
the date of petition till realization, against the second respondent being
the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by
the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and
the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims
enhancement under the following heads:
5.1. Notional income - The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant was a coolie and the tribunal has
fixed the monthly income notionally at ₹4,000/-, which is on the lower
side. Even going by the judgment in Ramachandrappa v. Manager,
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 13 SCC
236], the monthly income of the appellant ought to have been fixed at
₹7,500/-. Accordingly, in order to award a just and reasonable
compensation, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I
deem it appropriate to refix the monthly income of the appellant at
₹7,500/-.
5.2. Loss of earnings - The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant was a coolie by profession and due
2025:KER:67779
..4..
to the injuries sustained in the accident, he could not go to work for
almost four months, however, the tribunal has taken only a period of
one month for awarding compensation towards loss of earnings. The
appellant sustained an undisplaced fracture fibula shaft lower third and
multiple abrasions in legs. Considering the nature of injuries sustained
and the age of the appellant, I am of the opinion that three months can
be taken for awarding compensation for loss of earnings. Accordingly,
the appellant will be entitled to get a total compensation of ₹22,500/-
(7500 x 3) under this head. Thus, there will be an additional
compensation of ₹18,500/- towards loss of earnings.
5.3. Pain and suffering - The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that though the appellant claimed ₹30,000/- towards
pain and suffering, the tribunal awarded only ₹15,000/-. Considering the
injuries sustained by him and the sufferings that he had undergone, I
am inclined to grant an amount of ₹25,000/- to the appellant as total
compensation towards pain and suffering. Thus, the appellant will be
entitled to get an additional amount of ₹10,000/- as compensation
towards pain and suffering.
5.4. Loss of amenities - The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the tribunal awarded no compensation towards
2025:KER:67779
..5..
loss of amenities. Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, I
deem it appropriate to award a total compensation of ₹20,000/- towards
loss of amenities.
6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of
compensation under other heads as well, on a perusal of the records
available and the impugned award, I am not inclined to interfere with
the same since it appears to be just and reasonable.
7. Since the appeal is of the year 2014, I fix the interest
on the enhanced compensation @ 7% per annum from the date of the
claim petition till realization. Thus, the impugned award of the tribunal
is modified as follows:
Sl.
No. Head of Claim Amount Amount Modified Total
claimed awarded in appeal compensation
(in ₹) by the (in ₹) (in ₹)
tribunal
(in ₹)
1. Loss of earnings 9000 4000 18500 22500
2. Pain and suffering 30000 15000 10000 25000
4. Transportation 5000 1000 - 1000
charges
clothing
6. Medical expenses 20000 6647 - 6647
7. Loss of amenities - - 20000 20000
Total 27647 48500 76147
rounded
off to
27650
2025:KER:67779
..6..
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is
awarded an additional compensation of ₹48,500/- (Rupees forty eight
thousand and five hundred only) over and above the compensation
awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of
petition till realization and proportionate costs. The respondent insurer
shall deposit the said amount together with interest and costs within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment. The appellant shall furnish copies of the PAN Card,
AADHAAR Card and bank details before the respondent insurer within a
period of one month so as to enable the insurance company to make the
deposit as ordered above. In case of failure to furnish details as above, it
shall be open for the insurance company to deposit the said amount
before the tribunal. Upon such deposit being made, the entire amount
shall be disbursed to the appellant at the earliest in accordance with
law. However, it is made clear that the enhanced compensation will not
carry interest for the period of delay of 133 days in filing the appeal.
SD/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
bka/-
