Allowed

Santha Amma v. Eriyattu Kuzhiyil Ashrad

Kerala HC14 Jun 2016RP/440/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a review of an order denying full motor accident compensation due to alleged contributory negligence, the Court held that a prior award fixing sole negligence on the driver was omitted during appeal finalisation. The Court found an error apparent on the face of records and modified the order to grant full compensation with interest.

What did the court decide?

The order fixing 50% deduction from enhanced compensation of Rs. 34,450/- was modified; entire amount with interest to be paid to the appellant.

Santha Amma Vs Eriyattu Kuzhiyil Ashrad — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

& THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/24TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶6

RP.No. 440 of 2016 () IN MACA.1446/2006 -----------------------------------------

¶7

(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN MACA 1446/2006 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 16-03-2016)

¶8

REVIEW PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

¶9

SANTHA AMMA AGED 48, W/O THANKAPPAN, PUTHUPURACKAL HOUSE, MUDAVANCODE, KARAD P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.NOBLE MATHEW

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

ERIYATTU KUZHIYIL ASHRAD S/O BEERAN, KOORAD P.O., WANDOOR VIA, KOOKIPARAMBA, MALAPPURAM DISRICT (DRIVER)

¶13

KULANGARA MUHAMMEDALI S/O SEETHI, VANIYAMBALAM P.O., VANIYAMBALAM, MALAPPURAM DIST.(OWNER)

¶14

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BRANCH UP HILL, MALAPPURAM.

¶15

BY SMT.P.K.SANTHAMMA

¶16

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ.

¶18

R.P.No.440 OF 2016 IN M.A.C.A.NO.1446 OF 2006

¶19

Dated this the 14^th June, 2016

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

¶22

This Review Petition has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved of the deduction of 50% of the enhanced compensation awarded by this Court, referring to the course pursued by the M.A.C.T., Manjeri, as per the award dated 28.10.2005, fixing 50% contributory negligence on the driver of the autorickshaw, in which the appellant/claimant was travelling.

¶23

The learned counsel for the review petitioner points out that, after passing the award dated 28.10.2005, the correct factual position was brought to the notice of the Tribunal, also producing a copy of the charge sheet and the award was sought to be reviewed by filing I.A.No.4977 of 2005. After hearing, on being satisfied with the merit involved, the Tribunal was pleased to review the award dated 28.10.2005 by passing a modified

¶24

¶25

R.P.No.440 OF 2016 IN M.A.C.A.NO.1446 OF 2006

¶26

award on 28.03.2006, as endorsed on the last page of the award, whereby the negligence was solely fixed on the driver of the jeep. Accordingly, the entire compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs.32,127/- was ordered to be paid to the claimant. This however was omitted to be pointed out, when the appeal was finalised by this Court and hence the Review Petition.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, who does not dispute the factual sequence as above.

¶28

In the said circumstance, this Court finds that there is an error apparent on the face of the records and hence interference is warranted. Accordingly, the verdict passed by this Court on 16.03.2016 fixing the additional compensation payable to the appellant/claimant as Rs.34,450/- ordering 50% deduction therefrom, will stand modified. This Court holds that the entire enhanced compensation of Rs.34,450/- is liable to be paid to the appellant/claimant, with interest at the rate, as stipulated therein. In view of the changed circumstances, the respondent

¶29

R.P.No.440 OF 2016 IN M.A.C.A.NO.1446 OF 2006

¶30

¶31

Insurance Company is granted one more month's time to satisfy the entire liability.

¶32

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶33

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶34

Santha Amma v. Eriyattu Kuzhiyil Ashrad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santha Amma v. Eriyattu Kuzhiyil Ashrad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shabu Vs Anju

The Administrator Vs T.Cheriya Koya

Secretary, Kerala Public Service Commission Vs Ashalekshmi

Savithri Vs State of Kerala

E.K.Narayanan Vs Union of India

A.K.Raveendran and Another Vs Secretary, Kerala Motor Labour Union