Allowed

Jinesh.M.R v. Mohammed Rasad

Kerala HC18 Jul 2022MACA/2361/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the appeal seeking enhancement of compensation in a motor accident case. The court enhanced compensation for loss of earnings, pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and daily expense rates, and directed the insurance company to pay the enhanced amount.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarded; loss of earnings fixed at Rs. 30,000; pain and suffering to Rs. 35,000; loss of amenities at Rs. 30,000; increased daily rates for bystander and nourishment; total enhan

Jinesh.M.R Vs Mohammed Rasad — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 27TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

MACA NO. 2361 OF 2014

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 12.3.2013 IN OPMV 65/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , IRINJALAKUDA

¶7

APPELLANT/APPLICANT:

¶8

JINESH.M.R S/O. RAPPAI, MAROTTICKAL HOUSE, KOODAPUZHA DESOM, CHALAKUDY.

¶9

BY ADV A.N.SANTHOSH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 MOHAMMED RASAD S/O. ABDUL ASESS, THEKKULLAKANDY HOUSE, UNNIKULAM.P.O., BALUSSERY DESOM, KOZHIKODE. 2 NARAYANAN S/O. KUNJAMBU, 37/525 F(4/1501), PARADAM, CALICUT. 3 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. KINGSWAY BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, MAVOOR ROAD JUNCTION, CALICUT-673001. 4 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NO.II,P.B. NO. 192, SEEMA TOWERS, MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673001. BY ADVS. SRI.N.S.NAJEEB SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD FOR R4 SRI.C.JOSEPH JOHNY SRI.RAJESH THOMAS FOR R3

¶12

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MACA 2361/2014

C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

-----------------------------------MACA No.2361 of 2014

¶17

------------------------------------Dated this the 18^th day of July, 2022

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

The appellant is the injured in an accident which occurred on 3.6.2007, which is the subject matter of O.P(M.V) No.65/2008 of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda. This appeal is directed only for enhancement of compensation awarded under various counts.

¶20

The following are the grounds under which the appellant seeks enhancement of compensation. The first is with respect to the monthly income reckoned, wherein the appellant/claimant claimed a sum of Rs.6,000/-, as against which, the Tribunal reckoned Rs.3,000/- only. Learned counsel pointed out that even going by the index indicated in Ramachandrappa v. The Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. [(2011) 13 SCC 236] , a sum of Rs.6,000/- is liable to be taken, which submission is not disputed by the counsel for the fourth respondent/insurance company. Therefore, the said amount is liable to be taken as the monthly income.

¶21

MACA 2361/2014

¶22

¶23

The second count is with respect to loss of earnings. Learned counsel pointed out that the petitioner underwent treatment as an inpatient for a period of 90 days in various spells. He was certified to have 24% disability by the Medical Board. However, no amount has been granted by the Tribunal towards loss of earnings. This Court finds that inasmuch as the petitioner had undergone inpatient treatment for a period of 90 days, it would be reasonable to reckon the period of five months for the purpose of loss of earnings. It is so done.

¶24

The third ground is with respect to pain and suffering, wherein Rs.20,000/- alone was reckoned by the Tribunal. Learned counsel invited the attention of this Court to the fact that the appellant/claimant had suffered severe injuries and as many as four fractures. He had to undergo three surgeries. In such circumstances, the pain and suffering reckoned at Rs.20,000/- is grossly insufficient, is the submission of the learned counsel. This Court can only endorse the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, wherefore the loss on account of pain and suffering is enhanced to Rs.35,000/-, specifically reckoning the fact that the appellant had undergone

¶25

MACA 2361/2014

¶26

¶27

three surgeries in respect of four fractures, which fact is made mention of in paragraph no.8 of the impugned award.

¶28

The fourth ground is under the head loss of amenities. Here again, learned counsel pointed out that the appellant/claimant had to undergo treatment for a period of three years, that is to say from 2007 to 2010, besides treatment as an inpatient for a period of 90 days. He had suffered 24% disability as certified by the Medical Board. In such circumstances, non grant of any compensation under the head loss of amenities would be highly inequitable is the submission of the learned counsel. This submission again is liable to be recognised and this Court, having regard to all the attendant circumstances referred to above, fix the compensation on account of loss of amenities at Rs.30,000/-.

¶29

The bystander expenses and the extra nourishment were given reckoning the same at Rs.100/- each per day. The bystander expenses is liable to be enhanced to Rs.200/- and the extra nourishment to Rs.150/- per day.

¶30

MACA 2361/2014

¶31

¶32

In the result, this appeal is allowed and the compensation amount liable to be paid to the appellant/claimant will be as indicated in the tabular column shown below.

¶33

Sl. No.	Head of claim	Amount awarded by the Tribunal(Rs)	Total amount after enhancement in appeal (Rs.)
1	Loss of earning	Nil	30,000 (6000x5)
2	Medical and miscellaneous expenses	1,51,115	1,51,115
3	Transportation expenses	12550	12550
4	Pain and suffering	20000	35000
5	Permanent disability	1,46,880	*2,93,760
6	Extra nourishment	9000	13,500 (150x90)
7	Loss of amenities	Nil	30000
8	Bystander's expenses	9000	18000
	Total	3,48,545	5,83,925
	Amount enhanced =Rs.2,35,	380/-(5,83,925	– 3,48,545)

¶34

(Disability : 6000x12x17x24%)

¶35

The fourth respondent/Insurance Company shall pay interest for the amount 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 amount has already been paid, the same shall be granted set off. Since there was a delay of 453 days in filing the appeal, the interest for the enhanced quantum shall not run for the said period, as

¶36

MACA 2361/2014

¶37

¶38

directed in order dated 14.1.2022 in C.M.Appl.No.1/2014 (CMAP No.2730/2014). The claimants shall produce the details of the Bank account before the Insurance Company/Tribunal 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.

¶39

Sd/C.JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶40

Jinesh.M.R v. Mohammed Rasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jinesh.M.R v. Mohammed Rasad

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

Vasantha Vs National Insurance Company Limited

P.K. Dasan Vs Manikandan R

Nabeesa Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd

Shailaja Vs Aaron

Fathima Vs Nazar

S.Prabhakaran Vs the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.