Allowed

Antu v. Naseema

Kerala HC22 Oct 2021MACA/212/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court set aside the Tribunal's award of Rs. 2,99,900. The Court fixed the compensation for a 21-year-old deceased at Rs. 4,80,000 for loss of dependency. It directed the respondents to pay an additional Rs. 1,84,600 with 9% per annum interest from the date of the remedy.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed awarding an additional compensation of Rs. 1,84,600 along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation, excluding the period o

Antu Vs Naseema — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

MACA No. 212 of 2015

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 30TH ASWINA, 1943 MACA NO. 212 OF 2015

¶7

AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 10.06.2013 IN OPMV 1000/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR

¶8

APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

¶9

1 ANTU AGED 63 YEARS S/O. DEVASSY, 2 ELSY AGED 53 YEARS W/O. ANTU 3 SINTO AGED 29 YEARS S/O. ANTU 4 SINDU AGED 36 YEARS D/O. ANTU 5 SEENA AGED 34 YEARS D/O. ANTU 6 SIMI AGED 31 YEARS D/O. ANTU, ALL ARE RESIDING AT MALIAKKAL HOUSE, P.O.VATANATHARA, PACHILAPPURAM, (VIA) ALAGAPPA NAGAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.A.R.NIMOD

¶10

MACA No. 212 of 2015

¶11

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 NASEEMA W/O. SHABEER, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 49/316, CHETACHAL NIKATHIL, P.O.KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 682 001.

¶14

2 SIVADASAN S/O. CHELLAN, RESIDING AT CHINBUKAD DESOM, P.O.KUTHANOOR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678721.

¶15

3 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED JEWEL ARACADE, LAYAM ROAD, COCHIN-652011. BY ADV SMT.SANTHI K.S., FOR R3

¶16

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.09.2021, THE COURT ON 22.10.2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MACA No. 212 of 2015

T.R.RAVI, J.

M.A.C.A.No. 212 of 2015

¶21

Dated this the 22^nd day of October, 2021

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhanced compensation. The claimants are the dependents of one Christo, who died in an accident which took place on 04.11.2007. The deceased was 21 years and the claim was put forward under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,99,900/- as compensation. Aggrieved by the award, the claimants have filed this appeal.

¶24

Heard Sri A.R.Nimod, learned counsel for the appellants and Smt.K.S.Santhi, learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent Insurer.

¶25

The short ground which has been raised by the counsel for the appellants is that the Tribunal went wrong in applying the principles for award of compensation under Section 163A. The contention raised by the appellants are justified. The Tribunal has adopted the multiplier method after fixing a notional income of Rs.3,300/- and the multiplier has been fixed at '11'. Going by the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, the amount to be taken

¶26

MACA No. 212 of 2015

¶27

¶28

for fixing the compensation for loss of dependency in the case of a 21 year old will be Rs.7,20,000/-. After deducting one-third towards personal expenses, the sum payable towards loss of dependency will be Rs.4,80,000/- . Apart from the amount payable under the head loss of dependency, the appellant will be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs.2,000/- towards transportation expenses totalling to Rs.4,84,500/-. After deducting the amount of Rs.2,99,900/- which has already been granted by the Tribunal, the appellant will be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,84,600/- as additional compensation.

¶29

The appeal is hence allowed awarding an additional compensation of Rs.1,84,600/- (Rupees One Lakh Eighty Four Thousand and Six Hundred only) with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realisation, with proportionate costs. The appeal was filed with a delay of 454 days and the delay was condoned by order dated 26.08.2019 on condition that the appellants will not be entitled to interest for the period of delay. The interest payable on the enhanced compensation shall be hence excluding the period of 454 days. The 3^rd respondent insurer shall deposit the additional compensation granted in this appeal along with the interest and

¶30

MACA No. 212 of 2015

¶31

¶32

proportionate costs, before the Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after deducting any amount to which the appellant is liable towards balance court fee and legal benefit fund. The disbursement of the compensation to

¶33

the appellant shall be in accordance with law.

¶34

Sd/- T.R. RAVI, JUDGE

¶35

Antu v. Naseema

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antu v. Naseema

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

Vyshakh George Vs Kodamthuruth Grama Panchayath

Kalloor Electronics and Lightings Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Pmr Lighting Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Sajitha Vs T.P.Riyas

P.C.Rasool, Rep. by His Power of Attorney Holder P.C.Rahees Vs M.Surendran

Babu Vs Principal General Manager