Allowed

Prasanna Kumar v. Mubash

Kerala HC17 Jun 2022MACA/1803/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the appellant's appeal against the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal's award. Enhanced monthly income to Rs. 8,000, accepted 12% disability, and increased compensation for pain and suffering and loss of amenities, totaling Rs. 2,42,169.

What did the court decide?

Award of total compensation of Rs. 2,42,169 with interest at 5% on enhanced amounts, payable within one month along with bank details.

Prasanna Kumar Vs Mubash — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1944 MACA NO. 1803 OF 2018

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 30.12.2017 IN OPMV 508/2012 OF THE ADDL. MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT - II), MAVELIKKARA

¶6

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶7

PRASANNA KUMAR, S/O PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ANIL BHAVANAM, CHERUTHANA.P.O, HARIPPAD. BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP SRI.P.J.JOE PAUL

¶8

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 MUBASH S/O ABUBAKER, VALLAPURACKAL HOUSE, PUNNAPRA.P.O,ALAPPUZHA-688004.

¶10

2 V.A.ABOOBAKER VALLAPURACKAL HOUSE,PUNNAPRA.P.O,ALAPPUZHA688004. 3 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD REP.BY ITS AREA MANAGER, AREA OFFICE, XL-3599, ELIZABETH ALEXANDER MEMORIAL BUILDING,MARINE DRIVE, COCHIN-682031. BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN SR. SMT.LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN SMT.K.S.SANTHI

¶11

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MACA 1803/2018

C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

MACA No.1803 of 2018

------------------------------------Dated this the 17^th day of June, 2022

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

Petitioner in OP(MV) No.508/2012 of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mavelikkara is the appellant herein. Award in the said OP(MV) is under challenge in this appeal. The accident occurred on 22.11.2011. The appellant/petitioner was a cycle repairer at the time of accident. A registration certificate issued by the Labour Officer has been produced in proof thereof.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the third respondent/Insurance Company. Perused the records.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant sought enhancement of compensation under the following heads:

¶21

MACA 1803/2018

¶22

¶23

The first ground is with respect to the monthly income, which was reckoned at Rs.4,500/- by the Tribunal. It is true that other than the registration certificate issued by the labour officer, no evidence has been adduced by the appellant in proof of his avocation/income before the Tribunal. In such circumstances, the only possible way out is to reckon the notional income as indicated in Sri Ramachandrappa v. The Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 13 SCC 236] . Accordingly, this Court fixes the monthly income at Rs.8,000/-.

¶24

The second ground is regarding reckoning of the disability, which has been certified at 12% by the medical board vide Ext.X1 certificate, whereas the Tribunal without any proper reason, reduced it to 3%. In answer to the same, learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that the disability of 12% is reckoned as permanent neurological disability, wherefore the same may not preclude the appellant/petitioner from continuing his job as a cycle

¶25

¶26

MACA 1803/2018

¶27

repairer. This Court finds it difficult to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the third respondent, inasmuch as it has been recorded by the Board in Ext.X1 certificate that the appellant/petitioner is suffering from mild swaying when walking, due to incoordination. Besides, he has hemi-sensory blending on the left hemiface also. The same will affect effective performance of his job as a cycle repairer, for which job, co-ordination matters Therefore, this Court is inclined to take 12% disability as certified in Ext.X1 certificate, especially when the certificate is issued by the Medical Board.

¶28

The third ground pertains to the head 'pain and suffering'. Learned counsel pointed out that the petitioner/appellant was an inpatient in Medical College Hospital, Kottayam for a period of 5 days. He suffered head injury in the nature of subdural hemorrhage. According to the learned counsel, the compensation awarded under the head pain and suffering,

¶29

MACA 1803/2018

¶30

¶31

i.e Rs.10,000/-, is insufficient. Having regard to the head injury sustained by the appellant/petitioner, as also, the factum that he has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 12%, this Court is inclined to enhance the compensation under the head pain and suffering to Rs.20,000/-.

¶32

The fourth head is with respect to loss on account of amenities for which Rs.6,000/- alone was granted by the Tribunal. According to the learned counsel, the same is on the lower side. Again, having regard to the injuries and the permanent disability occurred, this Court is inclined to enhance the compensation under the head loss of amenities to Rs.15,000/-.

¶33

In the aforesaid circumstances, the appellant/petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,42,169/- as detailed in the tabular column given below:

¶34

MACA 1803/2018

¶35

¶36

Sl. No.	Head of Claim	Amount awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.)	Total amount after enhancement in appeal (Rs.)
1	Loss of earnings	13500 (4500x3)	24000 (8000x3)
2	Transport to hospital	1000	1000
3	Extra nourishment	1000	1000
4	Damage to clothing	500	500
5	Medical Expenses	6669	6669
6	Bystander expenses	1200 (6x200)	1200
7	Pain and suffering	10000	20000
8	Disability income	24300	172800 (8000X12X15X12 /100)
8	Loss of amenities	6000	15000
	Total	64169	242169
	Amount enhanced =Rs.1	,78,000/-(242	169 - 64169)

¶37

The Insurance Company shall pay interest for the amounts awarded by the Tribunal at the rate directed in the impugned award and for the enhanced amounts at the rate of 5% from the date of petition. If any amounts have already been paid, the same shall be granted set off. The claimant/s shall produce the details of the Bank account before the Insurance Company/Tribunal

¶38

¶39

MACA 1803/2018

¶40

within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and amount shall be transferred to the Bank account directly through NEFT/RTGS mode, within a period of one month thereafter. If the Bank account is not furnished within the time stipulated, it is made clear that no interest shall run on the enhanced amount after the period stipulated by this Court. However, if the Insurance Company fails to deposit the amount as directed, interest on enhanced amount shall also run at the rate ordered by the Tribunal from the date of petition.

¶41

9. The appeal is allowed as indicated above.

¶42

Sd/C.JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶43

Prasanna Kumar v. Mubash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanna Kumar v. Mubash

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

Santha Vs v.K.Chandran

Sindhu Lakshmi Vs Sethumadhavan

Kuriakose Vs Lijo

O.Reshma Vs Ratnakaran M.V.

Geo Joy @ Joy Vs Raghavendra

Susamma Kurian Vs M.P.Salby