Kerala High Court
Renald @ Donald Mathews vs Sakeer P on 12 September, 2025
2025:KER:67981
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 21ST BHADRA, 1947
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 12/12/2019 IN OPMV NO.151 OF
2018 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
RENALD @ DONALD MATHEWS
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O. MATHEW, THONIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, ODIKUZHI P.O,
KOORACHUNDU, KOZHIKODE 673 527
BY ADV SHRI.ANIL KUMAR K.P.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 SAKEER P.,
S/O. KUNJOYI, PALATHINGAL HOUSE, EDAVANNA P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 541
2 ANVAR SADIQUE P.M,
S/O. MARAKKAR, PALLIYIL HOUSE, VAZAKADAVU P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 673 640
3 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER/AUTHORISED OFFICER,
JASEELA COMPLEX, NILAMBUR ROAD, MANJERI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 121
SRI.K.B.RAMANAND
SMT.DHANYA BABU
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 12.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
2
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A. No.1197 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th 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.151/2018 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Manjeri, (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of compensation
granted by Award dated 12/12/2019. The respondents herein are
respondents 1 to 3 respectively in the petition. In this appeal, the
parties and documents will be referred to as described in the
original petition.
2. According to the claim petitioner, on 30/12/2017 by
around 07:45 p.m., while he was riding motorcycle bearing
registration no.KL-56/Q-9975 from the place by name
Ramanattukara to Malappuram and when he reached the place by
name Kuriyodam, bus bearing registration no.KL-10/AM-9464
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner
knocked him down, as a result of which he sustained grievous
injuries. A sum of ₹4,00,000/- was claimed as compensation under
various heads.
3. The first respondent/owner and the second
respondent/driver of the offending vehicle remained ex parte.
4. The third respondent/insurer filed written statement
admitting the existence of a valid policy in respect of the offending
vehicle, but denied negligence on the part of the second
respondent/driver. The employment, income, etc., of the claim
petitioner were disputed. It was also contended that the amount
claimed as compensation is quite excessive.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced by
either side. Exts.A1 to A9 and Ext.X1 were marked on the side of
the claim petitioner. No documentary evidence was produced by the
third respondent/insurer.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the documentary
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
evidence and after hearing both sides, found negligence on the part
of the second respondent/driver of the offending vehicle resulting in
the incident and hence awarded an amount of ₹1,48,000/- 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, Floor Manager, Preethi Silks, Malappuram, was
earning ₹30,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal fixed the
notional income at ₹11,500/- and hence the same needs to be
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
appropriately enhanced. Per contra, it is submitted by the learned
counsel for the third respondent/insurer that in the absence of any
materials on record to prove the income, the amount of ₹11,500/-
fixed is quite reasonable and that it does not call for any
enhancement.
9.1. There are no materials on record to substantiate the
claim that the claim petitioner was earning ₹30,000/- per month.
Going by the dictum in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal
Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236, the
income of even a coolie in the year 2017 is liable to be fixed at the
rate of ₹11,000/- per month. Hence, in the facts and circumstances
of the case and in the absence of any other better evidence to
substantiate the income, I find that fixing the notional income at
₹13,000/- would be just and reasonable.
Loss of earnings
10. The materials on record show that following injuries
were sustained by the claim petitioner:
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
"1) fracture P3 of right ring finger
2) fracture base of meta carpel right and multiple
abrasion over right and middle fingers
3) lacerated wound 4x1x.5 cm right forehead."
In all probability, the claim petitioner might have been unable
to work for a period of 3 months. Therefore, I find that he can be
granted compensation towards loss of earnings for a period of 3
months, which comes to ₹39,000/- (13,000 x 3 months).
Extra nourishment
11. The accident in this case took place on 30/12/2017.
Therefore, he can be awarded compensation at the rate of ₹450/-
per day for a period of 4 days.
12. The impugned Award is modified to the following
extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in
No. claimed Awarded by appeal
(in ₹) Tribunal (in ₹)
(in ₹)
1. Loss of earnings 1,80,000/- 11,500/- 39,000/-
(11,500 x 1) (13,000 x 3)
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
2. Transport to 5,000/- 4,500/- 4,500/-
hospital (No Modification)
3. Extra nourishment 5,000/- 1,200/- 1,800/-
(450 x 4)
4. Damage to clothing 5,000/- 750/- 750/-
and articles (No Modification)
5. Bystander expenses 5,000/- Nil Nil
(No Modification)
6. Medical expenses 20,000/- 470/- 470/-
(No Modification)
7. Future treatment 20,000/- Nil Nil
(No Modification)
8. Compensation for 1,00,000/- 25,000/- 25,000/-
pain & suffering (No Modification)
9. Compensation for 1,00,000/- 1,04,328/- 1,17,936/-
permanent [(11,500+40%) [(13,000+40%)
disability & loss of x12x18x3/100) x12x18x3/100)
earning power
10 Compensation for 1,00,000/- Nil Nil
loss of amenities (No Modification)
11 Compensation for 20,000/- Nil Nil
disfigurement (No Modification)
Total 5,60,000/- 1,47,748/- 1,89,456/-
limited to rounded to
4,00,000/- 1,48,000/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the
compensation by a further amount of ₹41,456/- (total
compensation = ₹1,89,456/- that is, ₹1,48,000/- granted by the
Tribunal plus ₹41,456/- granted in appeal) with interest at the rate
2025:KER:67981
MACA NO. 1197 OF 2020
of 8% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization
(excluding the period of 76 days delay in filing the appeal) 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.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
NP
