Allowed

L.G.Sreekala v. Jabbar Alikunju

Kerala HC23 Oct 2018MACA/745/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal, the High Court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Court re-fixed the deceased's notional monthly income and adjusted the multiplier and depreciation for personal expenses, increasing the dependency compensation. Head damages for funeral, consortium, and love and affection were also enhanced based on Supreme Court dicta.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 2,91,320/- awarded with interest; appeal disposed of.

L.G.Sreekala Vs Jabbar Alikunju — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

MACA.No. 745 of 2008

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 1480/2002 of M.A.C.T.,PERUMBAVOOR

¶7

APPELLANTS-PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 3:

¶8

1 L.G.SREEKALA W/O.LATE SURESH BABU, D/O.GOVINDAN NAIR, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT LAKSHMI VILAS HOUSE, N.A.D. P.O., ALUVA.

¶9

2 ATHIRA (MINOR) DO.LATE SURESH BABU LAKSHMI VILAS, N.A.D., P.O.ALUVA.

¶10

3 AROMAL (MINOR) SO.LATE SURESH BABU, LAKSHMI VILAS, N.A.D., P.O.ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS AND PETITIONER NO.4 IN THE OP(MV):

¶12

1 JABBAR ALIKUNJU

¶13

S/O.ALIKUNJU, PEEDIKAPARAMBIL HOUSE,, CHETTIKKAD, KARUMALLOOR, ALUVA.

¶14

2 SRI.M.K.RAFEEQ SO.KHALID MUNDAPILLY HOUSE, THURUTHIPADY ROAD,, EDAYAPURAM P.O., ALUVA.

¶15

3 MS.UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. `SHARANYA', HOSPITAL ROAD, COCHIN P.O.-682 011.

¶16

4 CHANDY OMMEN SO.OMMEN, AYROOKUZHIYIL HOUSE, JNALAKEM KARA,, CHANKAMPUZHA NAGAR, AUGUST NURSING HOME,, ROAD, THRIKKARA NORTH VILLAGE.

¶17

5 A.C. THOMAS, AYROOKUZHIYIL HOUSE, AUGUNT NURSING HOME ROAD, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR PO, KOCHI – 682 033

¶18

MACA 745/08

¶19

¶20

6 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD, 1ST FLOOR, CHANDRIKA BUILDING, MG ROAD, COCHIN-682 011, ERNAKULAM

¶21

7 SAVITRIAMMA, AGED 56 YEARS,

¶22

MOTHER OF LATE SURESH BABU, VIRUTHIYIL HOUSE, NAD PO, SIVAGIRI ALUVA

¶23

BY ADV. SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR

¶24

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MACA 745/08

JUDGMENT

The appeal is for the enhancement of

¶29

compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶30

The appellants are the widow and children of the deceased. On 19.12.2001, the deceased was driving an autorickshaw along the road and when he reached the place of occurrence, a bus, driven, owned and insured by the respondents 1 to 3 before the Tribunal, came in a rash and negligent manner, hit against a car and thereafter, knocked down the deceased causing fatal injuries. In view of the gravity of the injuries, the deceased took his last breath, which led to the claim petition filed by the legal representatives before the Tribunal.

¶31

As a matter of fact, the claimants sought to implead the parties of both the bus as well as the car. One of the passengers in the bus had also filed a claim petition in respect of the injuries sustained by him. Both the claims are tried together before the Tribunal. The evidence adduced

¶32

MACA 745/08

¶33

¶34

from the part of the claimants consists of A1 to

¶35

A13. No evidence was adduced on part of the respondents. After considering the materials on record, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that negligence was solely on the part of the driver of the bus and the compensation accordingly.

¶36

getting a monthly income of Rs.5,000/- as driver

¶37

of the an autorickshaw. But the Tribunal has reckoned only Rs.2,500/- as the notional monthly income. The amounts granted by the Tribunal under different heads are in the following terms:

¶38

Loss of dependency	Rs.3,40,680/-
Transportation Expenses	Rs.2,000/-
Loss of estate	Rs.2,500/-
Funeral Expenses	Rs.4,000/-
Damage to clothings	Rs.250/-
Pain and suffering	Rs.5,000/-
Loss of consortium	Rs.15,000/-
Loss of love and affection	Rs.20,000/-
TOTAL	Rs.3,89,430/-

¶39

It is true, that no evidence was adduced

¶40

by the claimants in respect of the income of the deceased. But the fact remains that the accident

¶41

MACA 745/08

¶42

¶43

had occurred when the deceased was driving his autorickshaw, with regard to which there is no dispute. This being the position, the notional income reckoned by the Tribunal as Rs.2,500/- is on the lower side and this Court, considering the various aspects including the future prospects finds it appropriate to re-fix the same as Rs.4,000/- to work out the defective compensation.

¶44

At the same time, it is to be noted that the deceased was aged 33 years and as such, the multiplier adapted by the Tribunal as '17' is not correct, which should have been 16. It is also to be noted that the Tribunal has deducted '1/3' of the income towards the personal expenses, which ought to have been 1/4^th, based on the number of the dependents in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in Sarala Varma's case.

¶45

In the said circumstances, the dependency

¶46

compensation, on re-fixation, comes as Rs.4,000 x 12 x 3/4 x 16 = Rs.5,76,000/-. After giving credit

¶47

MACA 745/08

¶48

¶49

to the sum of Rs.3,40,680/- awarded by the

¶50

Tribunal, the deficit amount payable comes to

¶51

Rs.2,35,320/-. It is awarded accordingly. The

¶52

funeral expenses (Rs.4,000/-), loss of consortium (Rs.15,000/-) and loss of love and affection (Rs.20,000/-) awarded by the Tribunal are also on

¶53

the lower side, in view of the dictum laid down by the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in

¶54

National Insurance Company Ltd v. Pranay Sethi &

¶55

Others 2017(5) KHC 350 and the subsequent

¶56

verdicts. The said amounts stands enhanced to Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/and Rs.40,000/-

¶57

respectively; thus resulting in a shortage of

¶58

Rs.11,000/- , Rs.25,000/- and Rs.20,000/ -

¶59

respectively. The said amounts are awarded accordingly.

¶60

Thus, the total additional compensation payable comes to Rs.2,91,320/- (Rupees Two lakh

¶61

ninety one thousand three hundred and twenty

¶62

only) , which requires to be satisfied with

¶63

MACA 745/08

¶64

¶65

interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of claim petition, till satisfaction, except for the period of 249 days of delay in filing the appeal, which has been condoned today, subject to the rider to the said extent. The amount above shall be deposited by the respondent Insurance Company at the earliest, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶66

Appeal stands disposed of.

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶69

L.G.Sreekala v. Jabbar Alikunju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.G.Sreekala v. Jabbar Alikunju

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

Gopalan Vs T.C.Devarajan

Sumathy Vs T.C.Devarajan

Krishna Kumar Vs M.Assu and Others

Velayudhan Vs M.a.Lohithakshan

Bose @ Chandrabose Vs the President Kadappuram-Manthala & Ors.

Revamma @ Rema Vs Udayakumar & Others