Allowed

Sunilkumar v. the Managing Director, Ksrtc and Another

Kerala HC21 Feb 2023MACA/2642/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident appeal where the appellant contended that the Tribunal under-awarded compensation due to low notional income, the High Court enhanced the compensation by Rs.5,000/- and directed deposit with interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.5,000/- along with interest @7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit is granted.

Sunilkumar Vs the Managing Director, Ksrtc and Another — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 21STDAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 2ND PHALGUNA,1944

¶3

MACA NO. 2642 OF 2009

¶4

OPMV 1208/2004 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTs CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP(MV):

¶5

SUNILKUMAR, S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY NAIR,
THEKKOOT HOUSE, KALLUR ROAD, AMBALLUR DESOM,
ALAGAPPANAGAR P O, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶6

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.V.BABY
SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH

¶7

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 IN OP(MV):

¶8

1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM.

¶9

2 ALIYAR, S/O.MUHAMMED, KIZHAKKEVEETTIL, NEAR POST OFFICE, UZHAVALLOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV SRI.ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN P.A.

¶11

THISMOTORACCIDENTCLAIMSAPPEALHAVINGBEENFINALLYHEARD
ON 17.02.2023, THE COURT ON 21.02.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MACA 2642 of 2009

J U D G M E N T

This appeal has been preferred by the claimant in OP(MV) No.1208 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda. He is impugning the award dated 13.05.2009 on the ground of inadequacy of compensation.

¶16

On 27.03.2004, the petitioner met with a road traffic accident while he was pillion riding a motorcycle. KL-15-4652 KSRTC bus, driven by the 2^nd respondent, dashed against the motorcycle, and he was thrown down, and he sustained injuries. He was a 25 year old man, working in a soda making company, earning monthly income of R.5,000/-. Though he approached the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.1,36,000/-, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.17,450/-, and hence this appeal.

¶17

The 1^st respondent is the owner of the KSRTC bus and the 2^nd respondent is its driver. The accident and the injuries suffered by the appellant are not in dispute.

¶18

Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced from either side. Exts.A1 to A4 were marked from the side of the claimant.

¶19

Now let us see whether there is any irregularity or impropriety in the award passed by the Tribunal warranting interference.

¶20

MACA 2642 of 2009

¶21

¶22

The learned Tribunal found that the accident occurred

¶23

due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus by the 2^nd respondent, and the appellant suffered fracture of left clavicle in that accident. Though the appellant claimed monthly income of Rs.5,000/-, it was not proved before the Tribunal with any supporting documents. So the Tribunal took his notional income as Rs.2,000/-, which according to the appellant, is too low. He would contend that even going by the decision Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited [AIR 2011 SC

¶24

2951] , he was eligible to get his notion income fixed @ Rs.4,500/- as he was a 25 year old man able to do any job. Learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent also is amenable to take his notional income @ Rs.4,500/- for two months’ period, as he might not have been able to do his job at least for two months. So this court is inclined to award Rs.9,000/- (4500X2) toward loss of income. Since he was already paid Rs.4,000/- under the head ‘loss of income’, he is eligible to get the balance amount of Rs.5,000/-.

¶25

The compensation awarded under all other heads seems to be reasonable and it needs no interference.

¶26

In the result, the appellant is entitled to get enhanced compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only).

¶27

MACA 2642 of 2009

¶28

¶29

1. The 1^st respondent Managing Director, KSRTC,

¶30

Thiruvananthapuram is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) in the bank account of the appellant with interest @7% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The deposit must be in terms of the directives issued by this Court in Circular No.3 of 2019 dated 06/09/2019 and clarified in O.M.No.D1/62475 /2016 dated 07/11/2019 after deducting the liabilities, if any, of the appellant towards Tax, balance court fee and legal benefit fund.

¶31

The appeal is allowed accordingly. No order as to costs.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE

¶34

DSV/20.02.2023.

Sunilkumar v. the Managing Director, Ksrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunilkumar v. the Managing Director, Ksrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivek @ Vivek Singh Vs National Insurance Co.Ltd

Pradeep @ Pradeep Singh Vs National Insurance Co.Ltd.

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Sudheer

Benny Joseph @ Benny Vs T.Ravi and 3 Others

Sumesh Vs Hyderali

Anil G.P. Vs Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co.