Kerala High Court
Firoja vs Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd on 15 September, 2025
2025:KER:68589
MACA No.681/2015
..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 24TH BHADRA, 1947
MACA NO. 681 OF 2015
OPMV NO.473 OF 2010 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 FIROJA
AGED 60 YEARS
W/O. NOOR MUHAMMED, MATTUMANTHA HOUSE, NALLEPILLY P.O.,
CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
2 MADHEENA
AGED 21 YEARS
D/O. LATE FAKRUDEEN, MATTUMANTHA HOUSE, NALLEPILLY
P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3 SAMEENA
AGED 20 YEARS
D/O. LATE FAKRUDEEN, MATTUMANTHA HOUSE, NALLEPILLY
P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
4 ABDUL RAHMAN
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. LATE FAKRUDEEN, MATTUMANTHA HOUSE, NALLEPILLY
P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
SHRI.K.N.ABHILASH
2025:KER:68589
MACA No.681/2015
..2..
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
MANGALAM TOWERS, OPP. TOWN BUS STAND, T.B.ROAD,
PALAKKAD-678 014, POLICY NO.2209792334001890, VALID
FROM 24.5.2009 TO 23.5.2010.
BY ADV SHRI.K.B.RAMANAND
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. DHANYA BABU M B -FOR SC
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 15.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:68589
MACA No.681/2015
..3..
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimants in OP(MV) No.473
of 2010 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palakkad.
The respondent herein was the third respondent before the tribunal.
2. The case of the appellants/claimants is that on
23.01.2010, while the deceased was either riding or pillion riding on a
motorcycle along Chittur - Vandithavalam road, a tipper lorry bearing
Reg.No.10-Z/1481 driven by the second respondent in a rash and
negligent manner, hit the motorcycle, whereby the deceased sustained
fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, being the
legal heirs of the deceased, approached the tribunal claiming a total
compensation of ₹10,00,000/-.
3. Respondents 1 and 2/driver and owner of the offending
vehicle respectively remained ex parte before the tribunal. The third
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 A10 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 ₹7,23,000/- as
2025:KER:68589
..4..
compensation under different heads with interest @ 9% per annum from
the date of petition till realization, against the third respondent being
the insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by
the tribunal, the claimants have come up in appeal.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and
the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent insurer.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants claims
enhancement under the following heads:
5.1. Notional income - The learned counsel for the
appellants submits that the tribunal has fixed the monthly income of the
deceased 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 deceased ought to have been fixed at ₹7,500/-.
Accordingly, following the judgment in Ramachandrappa (supra), I
deem it appropriate to refix the monthly income of the deceased at
₹7,500/-.
5.2. Loss of dependency - Since the monthly income of the
deceased is refixed at ₹7,500/-, compensation towards loss of
dependency has to be recalculated. The deceased was 47 years old at
2025:KER:68589
..5..
the time of the accident and hence, 25% future prospects can be added
to the refixed income. Thus, after adding 25% of the notional income
towards future prospects, the amount would be ₹9,375/- (7500 + 1875).
Since there were five legal heirs, 1/4th of the income has to be deducted
towards personal expenses of the deceased and the multiplier to be
adopted is '13'. Accordingly, following the judgments in National
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017(4) KLT 662(SC)] and Sarla
Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation [2010(2) KLT 802(SC)], the
appellants will be entitled to get a total compensation of ₹10,96,875/-
(9375 x 12 x 13 x 3/4) towards loss of dependency. Hence, there will be
an additional amount of ₹6,28,875/- under this head.
5.3. Loss of consortium/loss of love & affection - The
learned counsel for the appellants submits that since there are five legal
heirs, the appellants are entitled to get a total compensation of
₹2,00,000/- (40000 x 5) towards loss of consortium, but no compensation
was awarded by the tribunal towards loss of consortium, which is per se
illegal. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the
appellants. However, on a perusal of the award, it is seen that the
tribunal awarded ₹2,25,000/- under the head, loss of love & affection,
which is impermissible and runs against the mandate in Pranay Sethi
(supra). Once compensation is awarded under the head of loss of
2025:KER:68589
..6..
consortium, no amount shall be awarded towards loss of love and
affection as it amounts to duplication of compensation as held in New
India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Somwati and others [2020 (5)
KLT OnLine 1198 (SC). Hence, the compensation of ₹2,25,000/- awarded
towards loss of love and affection is deleted and the appellants are
awarded a compensation of ₹2,00,000/- towards loss of consortium.
5.4. Loss of estate - The learned counsel for the appellants
submits that the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹5,000/-
towards loss of estate. It is further submitted that as per the judgment
in Pranay Sethi (supra), the compensation under conventional heads
ought to have been ₹15,000/- and further, 10% enhancement has to be
given in a span of three years from 2017. Thus, following the judgment
in Pranay Sethi (supra), I deem it appropriate to award to the
appellants a total compensation of ₹18,150/- towards loss of estate.
Hence, the appellants will be entitled to get an additional compensation
of ₹13,150/- under this head.
5.5. Funeral expenses - On a perusal of the award, it is
seen that the tribunal awarded an amount of ₹25,000/- towards funeral
expenses. However, going by the judgment in Pranay Sethi (supra), the
maximum amount of funeral expenses ought to have been granted by
2025:KER:68589
..7..
the tribunal is ₹15,000/-. Thus, there will be a deduction of ₹10,000/-
under this head.
6. Though the appellants 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 2015, I fix the interest
on the enhanced compensation @ 8% 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. Medical expenses 2000 - - -
2. Bystander 1000 - - -
expenses
3. Damage to 2000 - - -
clothing
4. Transportation 1000 - - -
5. Extra nourishment 1000 - - -
6. Pain and suffering 25000 - - -
7. Loss of love and 100000 225000 -225000 deleted
affection
8. Loss of consortium 200000 - 200000 200000
9. Loss of estate 50000 5000 13150 18150
10. Loss of 750000 468000 628875 1096875
2025:KER:68589
..8..
dependency
11. Funeral expenses 25000 25000 -10000 15000
12. Any other head 300000 - - -
Total 1000000 723000 607025 13,30,025
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellants
are awarded an additional compensation of ₹6,07,025/- (Rupees six lakh
seven thousand and twenty five only) over and above the compensation
awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 8% 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 appellants 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 appellants at the earliest in accordance with
law.
SD/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
bka/-
