Allowed

Padmini Mohanlal v. Sasi V.V.

Kerala HC23 Jun 2010MACA/608/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarding Rs. 2,91,000/- for the death of Mohanlal. The High Court modified the award, fixed the deceased's monthly income at Rs. 2,750/-, enhanced loss of dependency compensation by Rs. 90,000/-, increased loss of love and affection to Rs. 25,000/-, and raised the interest rate to 7.5% per annum

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded; interest enhanced to 7.5% per annum from the date of petition until realization of both the original and enhanced amounts; insurer directed to deposi

Padmini Mohanlal Vs Sasi V.V. — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932

¶5

MACA.No. 608 of 2004()

¶6

---------------------OPMV.701/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA

¶7

APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS

¶8

------------------------------------

¶9

1. PADMINI MOHANLAL @ PADMAVATHI, PUSHPATHARA HOUSE, VANDANAM P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

2. SALINI MOHANLAL, RESIDING AT PUSHPATHARA HOUSE, VANDANAM P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT (MINOR)

¶11

3. SYAMLAL MOHANLAL, RESIDDING AT PUSHPATHARA HOUSE, VANDANAM P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT (MINOR)

¶12

4. VANAJAKSHI, RESIDING AT PUSHPATHARA HOUSE, VANDANAM P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN

¶14

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶15

--------------------------

¶16

1. SASI V.V. S/O. VELU, PANACHALASSERIL PARAMBIL, C.C.DIVISION NO.16, THOPPUMPADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶17

2. ABDULKHADER, 'SAJUDAYIL', ODAPPALLY LANE, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶18

3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., THOPPUMPADY BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SHAM COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, BAZAR ROAD, MATTANCHERRY.

¶19

ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW

¶20

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.

¶22

¶23

M.A.C.A.No.608 OF 2004

¶24

¶25

Dated this the 23^rd day of June, 2010

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

Barkath Ali, J.

¶28

In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the claimants in O.P.(MV)No.701/1998 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Alappuzha challenge the judgment and award of the Tribunal dated June 10, 2003 awarding a compensation of Rs. 2,91,000/- for the loss caused to them on account of the death of deceased Mohanlal in a motor accident.

¶29

The facts leading to this appeal in brief are these :

¶30

Deceased Mohanlal was aged 42 at the time of the accident and used to earn Rs. 4,750/- per month as a Salesman in a Liquor shop, according to the claimants. Claimants are the widow, two minor children and mother of the deceased. On January 17, 1998 at about 11.15 p.m., deceased was pillion riding on the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KL-4C-4291 along Alappuzha-Kollam National Highway. Deceased Mony was riding the motor cycle. When they reached in front of the Govt.Girls High School,Ambalappuzha, a tourist bus

¶31

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004 2

¶32

driven by the first respondent came at a high speed and dashed against the back side of the motor cycle of the claimant. Deceased Mohanlal fell on the road and the bus ran over him. He succumbed to the injuries sustained on the way to the hospital. According to the claimants, accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent. First respondent as the driver, second respondent as the owner and third respondent as the insurer of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the claimants, who are the dependants and legal heirs of the deceased.

¶33

Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending bus remained absent and were set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer of the offending bus, filed a written statement admitting the policy, but denying the liability.

¶34

This O.P. was jointly tried along with another O.P. filed by the legal heirs of deceased pillion rider and a common award was passed by the Tribunal. Pws 1 to 4 were examined and Exts.A1 to A19 were marked on the side of the claimants before the Tribunal. Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the third respondent. The Tribunal on an appreciation of evidence found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus by first respondent and

¶35

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004

¶36

¶37

awarded a compensation of Rs. 2,91,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and proportionate cost. The claimants have now come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶38

Heard the counsel for the appellants/claimants and the counsel for the Insurance Company.

¶39

The accident is not disputed. The finding of the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the first respondent is not challenged in this appeal. Therefore, the only question which arises for consideration is whether the claimants are entitled to any enhanced compensation.

¶40

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of

¶41

Rs.2,91,000/-. The break up of the compensation awarded is as under :

¶42

Loss of dependency	- Rs. 2,40,000/-
Funeral expenses	- Rs. 3,500/-
Loss of consortium	- Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of love and affection	- Rs. 15,000/-
Pain and suffering	- Rs. 5,000/-
Loss of estate	- Rs. 10,000/-
Transportation expenses	- Rs. 2,500/-

¶43

Counsel for the claimants sought enhancement of

¶44

compensation for the loss of dependency and for loss of love and

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004

affection.

The Tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.2,000/- which works out to Rs. 24,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 16,000/- was taken as his annual contribution to his family. The Tribunal adopted a multiplier of 15 and awarded Rs. 2,40,000/- for the loss of dependency. As deceased Mohanlal was a Salesman in a liquor shop as evidenced by his salary certificate, Ext.P11, we feel that his monthly income can be reasonably fixed at Rs. 2,750/- which works out to Rs. 33,000/- per annum. After deducting 1/3 for his personal expenses, the balance amount of Rs. 22,000/- can be taken as his annual contribution to his family. The multiplier adopted by the Tribunal as 15 is not seriously challenged. Thus calculated for the loss of dependency, the claimants are entitled to Rs. 3,30,000/- ( 22,000 x 15). Thus on this count, the claimants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.90,000/-.

¶49

For loss of love and affection, Rs. 15,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal which appears to be quite inadequate. Taking into consideration the age of the claimants, we feel that a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- would be reasonable on this count. As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we find the same to be

¶50

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004 5

¶51

reasonable and therefore are not disturbing the same.

¶52

There is another aspect in this case. The Tribunal awarded interest only @ 6% per annum which appears to be very low. The claimants are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation.

¶53

12 In the result, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-. They are entitled to interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realisation for the compensation already awarded and also for the enhanced compensation. They are also entitled to proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer of the offending vehicle shall deposit the amount before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the above extent.

¶54

The Appeal is disposed of as found above.

¶55

A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE

¶56

P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE

¶57

sv.

¶58

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004 6

¶59

M.A.C.A.No.608/2004 7

Padmini Mohanlal v. Sasi V.V.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padmini Mohanlal v. Sasi V.V.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santhoshkumar Vs J.Surapalan

Bukhary Vs Raziya Beegam

Nirmala Vs M/S.J.P.Associates

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs P.K.Sreekumary Amma

C.P.Pious Vs Alice Thomas

Noble C.Paul Vs Saju Joseph