Allowed

V.v.Kumaran v. Sureshbabu

Kerala HC18 Sept 2017MACA/1968/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court (Kerala) allowed the appellant's appeal against the Mamunapuram MCC Tribunal award. The Court held that in absence of contrary evidence, the appellant's self-stated income of Rs.4,000/month must be accepted per Supreme Court precedent. The Court enhanced compensation by Rs.19,500 for loss of income and amenities.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.19,500 granted for loss of income for three months and amenities; respondent insurer directed to pay total award within 30 days with 12% interest.

V.v.Kumaran Vs Sureshbabu — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/27TH BHADRA, 1939

¶5

MACA.NO. 1968 OF 2014 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN O.P.(M.V.) NO.476/2010 OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM DATED 10-09-2013

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS:

¶8

V.V.KUMARAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, VARIYATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KADALASSERY DESOM, VALLACHIRA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. SURESHBABU, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.SANKUNNY, PANAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ARATTUPUZHA DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680001. (OWNER CUM DRIVER OF REG.NO.KL-8/D-2084 AUTO RICKSHAW).

¶12

2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001. P NO.441100/31/2010/5589.

¶13

3. JOHNSON,AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KOCHAPPAN, CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, THRISSUR, PIN-680001. (DRIVER OF THE BUS BEARING NO.KL-08/U-6853)

¶14

4. V.G.JAGADEESAN,AGED NOT KNOWN, S/O.V.A.GANGADHARAN, VELLANCHERY HOUSE, NATTIKA P.O., THRISSUR-680016. (OWNER OF THE BUS BEARING NO.KL-08/U-6853)

¶15

5. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., 2ND FLOOR, GLOBAL PLAZA, OPP NEW RAILWAY, VACHIKULAM ROAD, POOTHOLE, THRISSUR-680001, POLICY NO.2204792340001850 VALID FROM 28/6/2009 TO 27/6/2010.

¶16

R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SANTHI

¶17

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

P.D. RAJAN, J. -----------------------M.A.C.A. No.1968 of 2014

¶20

Dated this the 18^th day of September, 2017

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

This appeal is preferred against the award in O.P.(M.V.) No.476 of 2010 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottappalm. The appellant's case is that on 03.03.2010 at 5.00 p.m., while he was travelling in an auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KL-08/D-2084 and when it reached at the place of occurrence a bus bearing registration No.KL-8/U-6853 driven by the 1^st respondent in a rash and negligent manner hit against the auto rickshaw and thereby he sustained serious injuries. Immediately he was removed to Jubilee Mission Hospital, Thrissur. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.28,200/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate cost. Being aggrieved by that, the claimant preferred this appeal.

¶23

In the trial court, the 2^nd respondent

¶24

admitted the insurance of the auto rickshaw. The tribunal exhonerated the driver, owner and insurer of the bus

¶25

M.A.C.A. No.1968 of 2014 2

¶26

KL-8/U-6853 from liability. The petitioner did not adduce any oral evidence but his documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A12. Respondents evidence consists of Exts.B1 to B4. The learned tribunal awarded the following amounts as compensation. Loss of earning Rs.4,500/(3000x1½), Medical and miscellaneous expenses Rs.6,000/-, Personal assistance Rs.1,600/-, Transportation expenses Rs.1,000/-, Extra nourishment Rs.1,600/-, Damage to clothing etc. Rs.500/-, Pain and sufferings Rs.10,000/-, Loss of enjoyment and amenities of life Rs.3,000/-. The total amount awarded by the tribunal is Rs.28,200/-.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that just amount was not awarded by the learned tribunal. The loss of income taken by the tribunal is very low. The appellant is a Coolie by profession and was earning an amount of Rs.4,000/- per month. But, the learned tribunal took only Rs.3,000/- as his monthly income and awarded an amount of Rs.4,500/- for 1½ months which is very meagre. It is true that the injured in a motor accident claim petition is entitled to get just

¶28

M.A.C.A. No.1968 of 2014 3

¶29

amount as compensation. Apex court in Syed Sadiq and Others v. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited (2014) 2 Supreme Court Cases 735 it was held that where the injured is working as a coolie and he stated that he was earning Rs.4,000/- per month as his monthly income, in the absence of any other documentary evidence, that income has to be admitted. In this case, the trial court reduced the income from Rs.4,500/- to Rs.3,000/- that is illegal and the statement of the injured has to be admitted.

¶30

Considering the decision rendered by the

¶31

Apex Court, I am of the view that, in the absence of any evidence, reducing the income from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.3,000/- by the learned tribunal is unsustainable and the appellant is entitled to get Rs.4,000/- as his monthly income. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.12,000/(Rs.4000x3) is hereby granted for loss of income for three months. The learned tribunal already granted Rs.4,500/[loss of income for 1½ months by taking Rs.3,000/- as his monthly income] therefore, he is entitled to get the balance amount Rs.7,500/- on that head. The appellant

¶32

M.A.C.A. No.1968 of 2014 4

¶33

might have taken bed rest for three months. The amount awarded by the tribunal under the head loss of amenities is on the lower side, hence an additional amount of Rs.2,000/- is hereby granted on that head. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to get an amount of Rs.9,500/with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate cost in addition to Rs.28,200/- awarded by the learned tribunal. The respondent insurance company is directed to satisfy the award within thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment, failing which it will carry 12% interest from the date of petition.

¶34

This appeal is disposed of as above.

Sd/- P.D. RAJAN,

JUDGE

/ True Copy /

P.A. To Judge

V.v.Kumaran v. Sureshbabu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.v.Kumaran v. Sureshbabu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uno Security Service Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation

Sunil Kumar Vs the Manager

Majeed C.A. Vs Dishi

Sukumaran Achary Vs the Managing Director

A.M.Parameswaran Namboothiripad Vs Guruvayoor Devaswom Committee

Ajayakumar Vs Prasad