The High Court enhanced the motor accident compensation awarded to the appellant. It fixed notional income at Rs.6,000, corrected the age-based multiplier to 9, granted Rs.15,000 for loss of amenities, and recalculated bystanders expenses, resulting in a total of Rs.1,46,200.
Compensation enhanced to Rs.1,46,200 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 18TH BHADRA, 1943
MACA NO. 1211 OF 2012
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 02.12.2011 IN OPMV 371/2009 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALPETTA, WAYANAD
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
T. MATHAI AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. VARKEY, THAKARAPPALLIL VEEDU, P.O.KUNNAMANGALAM, NALLOORMAD VILLAGE, MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.R.SUDHISSH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.K.R.RANJITH
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 P.A. BAIJU, S/O. P.P.AUGUSTY, 1/147, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NADAVAYAL, WAYANAD DISTRICT 673101. 2 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE-I, P.B.NO.207, PARCO TOWER, IVTH FLOOR, P.M.TAJ ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 001.
BY ADV SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN THIRUVALLA, FOR R2
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.08.2021, THE COURT ON 09.09.2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
2
JUDGMENT
The appellant while travelling in a car, on 09.02.2009 from Wayanad to Theni met with an accident, wherein the car capsized and fell into a nearby field. The appellant sustained injuries of fracture of medial malleolus left and a sprain in the ankle. He was taken to the Well Care Hospital, Palakkad. Ext.A4 is the wound certificate issued. He was treated as an inpatient for one day and was discharged on 10.02.2009. He continued his treatment from Leo Hospital, Kalpetta, where he was treated between 10.02.2009 to 17.02.2009 and later between 23.08.2010 to 26.08.2010 for the purpose of removing the implant. He had preferred a claim before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Wayanad.
The Tribunal awarded a sum of ₹84,900/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum as compensation. Aggrieved by the quantum of the compensation awarded, the appellant has preferred
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
3
this appeal.
2. Heard Sri.Sudhissh R., learned counsel for
the appellant and Sri.George Cherian, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The main contention of the appellant is that the Tribunal went wrong in fixing the notional income of the appellant as 3,000/-. According to₹ the appellant, he was working as a Coolie as well as was an Agriculturist and he had claimed 6,000/- to₹ be his monthly income. Relying on the decision in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.Ltd. , reported in [AIR 2011 SC 2951], it is contended that the appellant is entitled to have his notional income fixed at 6,000/- at least₹ since the accident happened 5 years after the accident that was considered in Ramachandrappa supra . There is no serious objection to this contention from the insurer also since the law on the point is well settled. Another contention raised by the appellant is that the Tribunal did not
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
4
grant any amount towards loss of amenities and that the amount granted towards pain and suffering was very low. The next contention that is raised is that the petitioner was hospitalised for 13 days and the bystanders expenses that was granted was only at the rate of 100 per day, which was on the lower₹ side. It is further contended that the multiplier of 8 was wrongly applied. According to the appellant, he was 55 years old at the time of accident and the multiplier to be adopted was 11. Annexure A5 discharge summary would show the age of the appellant as 54. Annexure A8 discharge summary from the Leo Hospital also shows his age as 54 years. The claim petition shows his age as 55 years. It is seen from the file that on 26.08.2009, the Electoral Identity Card of the petitioner had also been placed before the Tribunal, which shows that his age as on 01.01.1999 was 45 years. Since there is no specific proof regarding the age, I do not find anything wrong with the finding of the
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
5
Tribunal that he had crossed the age of 55 at the time of the accident, which took place on 09.02.2009. Going by the judgment in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in 2010(2) KLT 802 (SC) the multiplier to be adopted in the case of persons who have crossed 55 years is 9. The multiplier 8 adopted by the Tribunal is hence not correct and it is to be 9 instead. Since no amount has been granted under the head loss of amenities, I am of the opinion that the appellant can be granted a sum of 15,000/- towards loss of amenities. The₹ manner in which the Tribunal had arrived at the compensation is shown in the form of a table:
| Sl. No. |
Head of the Claim |
Amount Claimed(Rs.) |
Amount Awarded(Rs.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loss of earning (total) | Rs.36,000/- | Rs.9,000/- |
| 2 | Loss of earning (partial) |
Nil | Nil |
| 3 | Medical and miscellaneous expenses |
Rs.50,000/- | Rs.32,000/- |
| 4 | Future treatment | N.A. | N.A. |
| 5 | Bystanders expenses | Rs.5,000/- | Rs.1,300/- |
| 6 | Transportation expenses | Rs.20,000/- | Rs.2,000/- |
| 7 | Extra nourishment | Rs.3,000/- | Rs.1,300/- |
| 8 | Damage to clothing, etc. |
Rs.1,000/- | Rs.500/- |
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
6
| 9 | Pain and suffering | Rs.25,000/- | Rs.10,000/- |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Loss of dependency | N.A. | N.A. |
| 11 | Loss of consortium | N.A. | N.A. |
| 12 | Loss of love and affection |
N.A. | N.A. |
| 13 | Compensation for permanent disability |
Rs.25,000/- | Rs.28,800/- |
| 14 | Loss of amenities and convenience, etc. |
N.A. | N.A. |
| 15 | Loss of earning power | Rs.25,000/- | Nil |
| 16 | Mental shock | Rs.25,000/- | N.A. |
| Total | Rs.84,900/- |
4. In the light of the modifications, which are
required for arriving at the just compensation, as
indicated in the previous paragraph, the compensation payable to the appellant is re-fixed in
the following manner:
| Sl. No. |
Head of the Claim |
Amount Claimed(Rs.) |
Amount Awarded(Rs.) |
Amount as modified by this Court(Rs.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loss of earning (total) |
Rs.36,000/- | Rs.9,000/- | Rs.18,000/- (6000x3) |
| 2 | Loss of earning (partial) |
Nil | Nil | |
| 3 | Medical and miscellaneous expenses |
Rs.50,000/- | Rs.32,000/- | Rs.32,000/- |
| 4 | **Future treatment ** | N.A. | N.A. | |
| 5 | Bystanders expenses |
Rs.5,000/- | Rs.1,300/- | Rs.2,600/- (200x13) |
| 6 | Transportation expenses |
Rs.20,000/- | Rs.2,000/- | Rs.2,000/- |
| 7 | Extra | Rs.3,000/- | Rs.1,300/- | Rs.1,300/- |
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
7
| nourishment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | Damage to clothing, etc. |
Rs.1,000/- | Rs.500/- | Rs.500/- |
| 9 | Pain and suffering |
Rs.25,000/- | Rs.10,000/- | Rs.10,000/- |
| 10 | Loss of dependency |
N.A. | N.A. | |
| 11 | Loss of consortium |
N.A. | N.A. | |
| 12 | Loss of love and affection |
N.A. | N.A. | |
| 13 | Compensation for permanent disability |
Rs.25,000/- | Rs.28,800/- | Rs.64,800/- (6000x12x9x 10/100) |
| 14 | Loss of amenities and convenience, etc. |
N.A. | N.A. | Rs.15,000/- |
| 15 | Loss of earning power |
Rs.25,000/- | Nil | Nil |
| 16 | Mental shock | Rs.25,000/- | N.A. | N.A |
| Total | Rs.84,900/- | Rs.1,46,200/- |
In the result, the appellant will be entitled to
an additional amount of 61,300/- (Rupees Sixty One₹ Thousand Three Hundred only) towards enhanced compensation. The 2nd respondent shall deposit the enhanced compensation awarded by this Court along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the petition (26.08.2009) till the date of payment, within 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after deducting
M ACA NO.1211 OF 2012
8
any amount to which the appellant is liable towards balance court fee and legal benefit fund. The disbursement of the compensation to the appellant shall be in accordance with law.
The appeal is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
T.R.RAVI
JUDGE
Pn
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the notional income of the appellant should be fixed at Rs.6,000 instead of Rs.3,000.
Whether the multiplier of 8 applied by the Tribunal is correct given the appellant's age of 55.
Whether additional compensation should be granted for loss of amenities and enhancement of other heads.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co.Ltd.Followed¶24
AIR 2011 SC 2951 · Who else cites this
Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport CorporationApplied¶28
2010(2) KLT 802 (SC)
T. MATHAI
P.A. BAIJU
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
T.R.RAVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
T.R.RAVI
Parties & counsel
