Kerala High Court

Kunjumol vs Mujeeb on 15 September, 2025

M.A.C.A.No.1331 of 2020

                                    1

                                                   2025:KER:68224
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 24TH BHADRA, 1947

                          MACA NO. 1331 OF 2020

         AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 31.12.2019 IN OPMV NO.1190

OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,

IRINJALAKUDA.

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

             KUNJUMOL
             AGED 57 YEARS,
             W/O. LATE KASIM,
             VALLATHUPADY HOUSE,
             KONATHUKUNNU MAVINCHUVADU DESOM,
             THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
             KONNATHUKUNNU.S.O P.O,
             THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680123.


             BY ADV SRI.V.BINOY RAM


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1       MUJEEB,
             S/O. ABDUL RAHMAN,
             THARUPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
             PUTHENCHIRA P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
             PIN - 680682.

     2       ABIN K.M,
             S/O. MURALI, KONATH HOUSE,
             PALAPRAKUNNU DESOM,
             KONATHUKUNNU P O,
             THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
             THRISSUR DISTRICT,
             PIN - 680123.
 M.A.C.A.No.1331 of 2020

                                2

                                              2025:KER:68224


     3       THE BRANCH MANAGER,
             UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD,
             MALIYEKKAL BUILDING,
             MAIN ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA P.O,
             PIN - 680121.


             BY ADV SHRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR


       THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 15.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 M.A.C.A.No.1331 of 2020

                                        3

                                                             2025:KER:68224


                               C.S.SUDHA, J.
               ----------------------------------------------------
                         M.A.C.A.No.1331 of 2020
               ----------------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 15th 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.1190/2017 on the file of the Motor Accidents

Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the

amount of compensation granted by Award dated 31/12/2019.

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

27/04/2017 at about 11:15 a.m., while she was pillion riding on a

scooter through Irinjalakuda-Kodungallur public road,

motorcycle bearing registration no.KL-45-L-0140 ridden by the

second respondent in a rash and negligent manner knocked her

2025:KER:68224

down, as a result of which she sustained grievous injuries.

3. The first respondent-owner and the second

respondent-rider of the offending motorcycle remained ex-parte.

4. The third respondent-insurer filed written

statement admitting the policy but denying negligence on the part

of the second respondent-rider. 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 A14 were marked on the side

of the claim petitioner. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of 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-rider of the

offending motorcycle resulting in the incident and hence awarded

an amount of ₹1,74,400/- together with interest @ 8% per annum

from the date of the petition till realisation along with

proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award, the claim

2025:KER:68224

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 tailor was earning ₹25,000/- per

month. However, the Tribunal fixed the notional income at

₹9,000/- which is quite low going by the dictum in

Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance

Insurance Company Ltd, (2011) 13 SCC 236.

9.1. In the light of the dictum in Ramachandrappa

(Supra), the notional income of the claim petitioner is fixed as

₹11,000/- per month.

2025:KER:68224

Permanent disability

10. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

claim petitioner that when the disability of the claim petitioner

has been assessed as 10.07% by the doctor as per Ext.A14, the

Tribunal was not justified in scaling it down to 5%. Taking into

account the avocation of the claim petitioner, the functional

disability ought to have been fixed as 10.07% and hence

necessary changes may be made to the impugned Award. Per

contra, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the third

respondent-insurer that Ext.A14 was not proved by examining the

doctor, who issued the same and therefore the contents of the

certificate do not stand proved. Further, the disability that has

been fixed by the Tribunal is quite reasonable and so the same

does not call for any interference.

10.1. The fact that the claim petitioner is a tailor is

not seen disputed. The materials on record show that the claim

petitioner sustained the following injuries-

2025:KER:68224

" Fracture to lower end of ulna."

10.2. Exhibit A14 disability certificate reads thus-

          "         Disability Certificate


                                                   22/11/19

This is to certify that Mrs. Kunjumol, 59 w/o Kasim, Vallathpady House, P.O. Konathukunnu following RTA On 27/4/17 attended in Irinjalakuda Cooperative Hospital, on 27/4/17 as OP No 317868 for

1. Fracture shead of right ulna

and managed conservatively

Now on clinical and radiological examination, she is having

1. Malunited fracture ulna right

2. Limitation of palmar flexion and dorsiflexion of 10% each and ulnar deviation of 10% due to partial ankylosis of right wrist with pain.

3. Weakness of Supinators and pronators of right forearm and Flexor Carpi Ulnaris and Extensor Carpi Ulnaris of 10% due to musculotendinous injuries at injured site.

2025:KER:68224

4. Weakness of grip strength of 10% and pinch strength of 5% and grasp of 10% each of right hand.

Functionally she has difficulty to i)grip strongly, to pinch strongly, to hook, to pull, to push, rotate, squeeze, to support, swing, to throw, to lift or carry heavy weight, with right dominant hand.

She is assessed to have a permanent disability for Right Upper Limb as

1.RIGHT Arm Component:-

a. Mobility: Right Wrist ;- 2% Strength;- 2% Total :-3.95%

b.Stability =15%

Total = 15+(3,95x75/90)=15+3.15 =18.15

Extras; Dominant Limb, malunion = 2%

Total for Right dominant Arm component =20.15%

Total whole body in relation to right upper limb =20.15x50% =10.07%

She is assessed to have a permanent disability as per national Guidelines as 10.07% (Ten point seven percentage) only."

Taking into account the avocation of the claim petitioner and in

the light of the dictum in Rajkumar v. Ajay Kumar, AIR

2025:KER:68224

Online 2010 SC 125, I find that the functional disability can be

fixed as 8%.

11. The learned counsel for the claim petitioner also

drew my attention to the compensation awarded under the other

heads and canvassed for an enhancement. However, on going

through the impugned award, I find that reasonble amounts have

been granted by the Tribunal and so no further enhancements are

called for.

12. 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 2,00,000/- 18,000/- 22,000/-

              earnings                                   (11,000/- x 2)
2.       Transportation      20,000/-        3,000/-         3,000/-
           expenses                                      (No modification)
3.           Extra           25,000/-        2,000/-         2,000/-
          nourishment                                    (No modification)


4.         Damage to         10,000/-        2,000/-         2,000/-
            clothing                                     (No modification)




                                                       2025:KER:68224

5.          Medical        1,00,000/-       Nil                Nil
            expenses                                    (No modification)
6.          Pain and       2,00,000/-     60,000/-          60,000/-
            suffering                                   (No modification)
7.         Permanent       8,00,000/-     59,400/-         1,16,160/-
           disability                                    (11,000/- x 12 x
                                                            11 x 8%)
8.         Bystander's      50,000/-        Nil                Nil
            expense                                     (No modification)
9.          Loss of        2,00,000/-     30,000/-          30,000/-
           amenities                                    (No modification)
10.      Hospitalisation    50,000/-        Nil               Nil
            expense                                     (No modification)
11.      Loss of earning   5,00,000/-       Nil               Nil
             power                                      (No modification)
12.        Anticipated     2,00,000/-       Nil               Nil
            medical                                     (No modification)
            expense
              Total        23,55,000/-   1,74,400/-        2,35,160/-
                           (limited to
                           5,00,000/-)

In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the

compensation by a further amount of ₹60,760/- (total

compensation = ₹2,35,160/- that is, ₹1,74,400/- granted by the

Tribunal + ₹60,760/- 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

2025:KER:68224

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.