Allowed

Najuma v. M.D., Ksrtc

Kerala HC16 Jun 2022MACA/387/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an appeal under Motor Accident Claims Appeal (MACA) No. 387 of 2014 regarding quantum of compensation awarded to the wife and minor children of a deceased motorcyclist. The Court enhanced the compensation for loss of dependency, loss of estate, and loss of consortium due to rash and negligent driving by a KSRTC bus.

What did the court decide?

Compensation for loss of dependency, loss of estate, and loss of consortium enhanced; total enhancement of Rs. 7,92,000/-; interest directed to be paid by the Insurance Company.

Najuma Vs M.D., Ksrtc — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶6

OPMV 1681/2009 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/S:

¶7

1 NAJUMA W/O SALIM, CHATHAMVELIMUGAL HOUSE, N.G.O., QUARTERS, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-21.

¶8

2 SHAJINA MINOR, AGED 11 YEARS D/O SALIM, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER NAJUMA, W/O SALIM, CHATHAMVELIMUGAL HOUSE, N.G.O., QUARTERS, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-21.

¶9

3 THASNI MINOR, D/O SALIM, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER NAJUMA, W/O SALIM, CHATHAMVELIMUGAL HOUSE, N.G.O., QUARTERS, KAKKANADU, KOCHI-21. (DIED) * - 3^rd appellant is died and the same is recorded as per order in I.A.1/22 in MACA 387/14 dated 26.8.22.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 M.D., KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶13

2 RATHINA BHAMI DETH V.K. S/O KUTTAPPAN, PALAKANDATH HOUSE, THOTTAKKATTUKARA, ALUVA-683 508.

¶14

3 SHAMSU, S/O ASEES, 18/334, CHATHAMVELIMUGAL HOUSE, THRIKKAKKARA, KOCHIN-682 021.

¶15

4 THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., JANATHA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHIN-682 025. BY ADVS.SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM) SRI.K.B.RAMANAND ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A.

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN.P.A - S.C,KSRTC

¶18

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

(Dated this the 16^th day of June 2022)

¶22

Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in O.P. MV No.1681 of 2009 on the files of the

¶23

MACT, Ernakulam, the petitioners therein, who are the wife and children of deceased Salim, filed this appeal.

¶24

On 24.12.2008 while the deceased Salim was

¶25

travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle bearing reg.No.KL-7BF 550 through NGO Quarters- Palarivattom

¶26

road and when reached at NGO quarters, a KSRTC bus bearing reg.No.KL-15/5183 driven by the 2^nd respondent, in a rash and negligent manner, tried to overtake the motor

¶27

cycle and the right side of the KSRTC bus hit on the motor cycle. As a result, Salim and the rider were thrown out and sustained serious injuries. On the way to hospital, Salim

¶28

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶29

-3-

¶30

died. The accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus by the 2^nd respondent. The first respondent is the owner of the KSRTC bus. Third respondent is the rider of the motor cycle and the fourth respondent is the insurer of the motor cycle. The appellants

¶31

claimed an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation.

¶32

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 together filed a written statement denying the allegation of rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC driver. Further contended that the accident happened due to the overspeed of the bike. Compensation claimed is exorbitant and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

¶33

Heard.

¶34

The counsel for the appellants submits that the

¶35

Tribunal awarded only an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- as loss

¶36

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶37

of dependency whereas the claim was for Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶38

Going by the decision in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited

¶39

[2011 (13) SCC 236], the notional income of the appellant can be taken as Rs.6,500/- as the accident happened in 2008. The counsel further submits that since the deceased was aged below 40 years and self-employed, going by the decision reported in National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [2017 (16) SCC 680], an addition of 40% of the income should be taken as future prospects. Thus, the income would be 6,500 + 2,600 (6500 *40%) = 9,100/- . Since he was having three dependents, one – third of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Going by Annexure Nos.A3 and A4, it is seen that the deceased was aged 38 years at the time of accident.

¶40

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶41

-5-

¶42

Accordingly, as per the decision reported in Sarla Verma v.

¶43

Delhi Transport Corporation & Another (2010 (2) KLT

¶44

802), the multiplier is taken as 15. Thus the loss of dependency can be worked out as 9,100 x 12 x 15 x 2/3= Rs.10,92,000/- The Tribunal awarded Rs.4,00,000/-.

¶45

Towards compensation for loss of estate,

¶46

Rs.10,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal. I am inclined to enhance the same to Rs.15,000/-.

¶47

The appellants/claimants being the wife and children, going by the decision reported in Magma General Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Others [(2028) 18 SCC 130] , are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head of compensation for loss of consortium. Thus, Rs.1,20,000/- is awarded in this appeal. The appellants were granted Rs.25,000/- towards loss of consortium by the Tribunal.

¶48

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶49

-6-

¶50

Accordingly, the following enhancements are made to the award passed by the Tribunal:

¶51

Sl. No.	Head of Claim	Amt. Awarded by Tribunal (Rs.)	Amt. Enhanced in appeal (Rs.)
1	Loss of consortium	25,000/-	1,20,000/-
3.	Loss of estate	10,000/-	15,000/-
4.	Loss of dependency	4,00,000/-	10,92,000
	Total	4,35,000/-	12,27,000/-
	Amount enhanced – 12,27,	000 - 4,35,000=	7,92,000/-

¶52

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the appellants are entitled to an amount of Rs. 7,92,000/- (Rupees seven lakh ninety two thousand only) and 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 7% from the date of petition. If any amounts have already been paid, the same shall be granted set off. 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

¶53

MACA NO. 387 OF 2014

¶54

-7-

¶55

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.

¶56

¶57

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

¶58

dl/

Najuma v. M.D., Ksrtc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Najuma v. M.D., Ksrtc

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

Mohammed Riyas (Minor) Vs Abubakkar

Kunjamma Vs Mili Jenis

Benny John Vs Georgekutty

Subhash.K.v Vs Maimoona

Balan Nair Vs Jubair.P.P and Others

Bindhu Rajendran Vs the Managing Director