Allowed

Rayees v. Anil Kumar T.P

Kerala HC8 Dec 2023MACA/4104/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a motor accident appeal, the Single Judge enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The Court fixed a revised monthly earning of Rs 10,000 instead of Rs 7,000 based on the appellant's qualifications, ordered additional awards for transportation, loss of amenities, and extra nourishment, and granted interest except for appeal delay. The appeal was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs 35,300 with interest granted; appeal allowed.

Rayees Vs Anil Kumar T.P — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶5

MACA NO. 4104 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 19.10.2019 IN O.P(M.V)NO.236/2018 OF MOTOR

¶7

ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VATAKARA

¶8

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶9

RAYEES V.P,
AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RASAK,
CHETHIL(H), KIZHUR (P.O), KOYILANDY TALUK,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673522
BY ADV SMT.K.REEHA KHADER

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT:

¶11

1ANIL KUMAR T.P
S/O.KRISHNAN, NAYANAM (H), MAYYANUR P. O,
VILLIAPALLY , VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673542

¶12

2 RINO GEORGE, S/O.VARGHEES, MALIAKKA (H), THERTHALLY P.O ALAKKODE, KANNUR, PIN - 670571

¶13

3NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
VATAKARA BRANCH (761301), AL- MUBARAK BUILDING, EDODI,
VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673101
BY ADVS.SMT.M.MEENA JOHN
 SRI.VIJU THOMAS(K/35/1985)
 SMT.MIKHIYA ANNA VIJU(K/000740/2019)

¶14

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED

¶15

THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 08^th day of December, 2023

¶20

The appeal on hand is originated from an award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vatakara (for short ‘the Tribunal’) on 19.10.2019 in O.P.(M.V.) No.236/2018. The appellant is the petitioner/injured before the Tribunal. He seeks for enhancement of the compensation stood awarded by the Tribunal.

¶21

For the sake of convenience, the parties to this appeal will hereinafter be referred to as the petitioner and respondents 1 to 3 in accordance with their status in the Original Petition.

¶22

The grievance of the petitioner was that his monthly income was fixed notionally by the Tribunal as `7,000/-, in spite of production and marking in evidence of Ext.A9 series with a view to establish his merits. According to him, the Tribunal did not consider those

¶23

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶24

¶25

documents for the reason that the petitioner failed to prove the same. According to the learned counsel the motor accident being occurred in the year 2017, the monthly income fixed notionally is too low and a modification is required, having due regard to Ext.A9 series. The learned counsel has also pointed out that though the petitioner has produced Ext.A7 series of trip sheets for a sum of 9,400/-, the Tribunal has awarded only 3,000/- as compensation towards transportation expenses. The learned counsel canvassed for consideration of the entire amount shown in Ext.A7 series as compensation. It is further contended by the learned counsel that the compensation stood awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and sufferings and loss of amenities and enjoyments in life are also on the lower side and modification is required.

¶26

Learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent has contended on the contrary that the compensation stood

¶27

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶28

¶29

awarded by the Tribunal under all heads are reasonable and there is no requirement to enhance those. It is submitted by the learned counsel that adequate compensation has been awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities and enjoyments in life. According to the learned counsel, petitioner also failed to establish disability.

¶30

It is found from the impugned award that petitioner has marked Ext.A1 to A9 series in evidence. Respondent did not adduce any evidence. Based on the evidence on record, the Tribunal found that the motor accident was occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing Registration No.KL-18M-1236 by the 2^nd respondent and therefore he is entitled to get compensation. The Tribunal has also arrived at a total sum of `1,25,490/- as compensation payable to the petitioner.

¶31

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶32

¶33

The Tribunal has fixed `7,000/- as the monthly income of the petitioner on a notional basis for the purpose of calculation of compensation for loss of earning. Ext.A9 series were not considered by the Tribunal for the reason that the petitioner failed to prove those. A perusal of Ext.A9 series would reveal that those include original of a certificate issued by the Superintendent of Survey and Land Records (Re-survey), Vatakara where it has been certified that the petitioner has successfully completed training in their organization as ‘TechnicianTrainee’ from 06^th March 2017 till 15^th February 2018. 2^nd document in Ext.A9 series is a certificate of Diploma in Automobile Engineering. It is established therefrom that the petitioner had passed in First division, the examination conducted by All India Technical Education Society in Automobile Engineering. Ext.A9 series would also reveal that the petitioner was issued with a certificate for having completed a two year course in Automobile

¶34

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶35

¶36

Engineering and having passed with First class, Kerala Government Certificate Examination in Engineering held in the year 2016. These are also original certificates. The next document among Ext.A9 series is a National Certificate in Modular Employable Skills issued by the National Council For Vocational Training. The next document among Ext.A9 series is a marklist obtained by the petitioner in the Diploma examination in Automobile Engineering held for the year 2016. It is found that the petitioner has passed the examination in First class. Petitioner claimed to be working as an Automobile Technician. The documents included in Ext.A9 series would establish that he was qualified to hold that post. In the above circumstances, the monthly income fixed by the Tribunal notionally as `7,000/- appears inadequate.

¶37

In view of the qualification held by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to consider a sum of `10,000/- as the monthly income earned by him. The

¶38

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶39

¶40

Tribunal has awarded compensation for loss of earning for a period of 6 months. The petitioner sustained type I schatzker fracture of left tibia. It is found from the medical documents on record that long leg slab was applied primarily and later on, long leg cast. Therefore the petitioner must have been in plaster for two months. Considering that aspect and the period of rest required by him after removal of the plaster, this Court is inclined to maintain the period of 6 months taken by the Tribunal for calculation of compensation towards loss of earning. When compensation for loss of earning is calculated with the modified monthly income, 60,000/- (10,000/- x 6) is arrived at. 42,000/- stood awarded by the Tribunal when adjusted against, petitioner will get 18,000/(60,000/- - 42,000/-) as additional compensation under that head.

¶41

Ext.A7 series are trip sheets produced by the petitioner and marked in evidence to establish that he had

¶42

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶43

¶44

spent a sum of 9,400/- towards transportation expenses. This Court has checked the trip sheets with the records and is convinced that 3,300/- had been spent by him towards transportation expenses in view of the motor accident. That amount itself is awarded as compensation and therefore the petitioner will get 300/- additionally. It is found that 50,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal as compensation towards pain and suffering. In the absence of any challenge, that is maintained.

¶45

This court finds that the compensation stood awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities and enjoyments in life is on the lower side and is inclined to award 15,000/- more. This Court is also inclined to award 2,000/- more towards extra nourishment.

¶46

In the manner of calculation of compensation afresh as above, petitioner will get ₹35,300/- (18,000/+ 15,000/- + 300/- + 2,000/-) (Rupees Thirty five thousand three hundred only) as the additional

¶47

M.A.C.A.No.4104 of 2022

¶48

¶49

compensation, which amount will also carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Petition till the date of realisation. 3^rd respondent being the insurer shall deposit the additional compensation with interest accrued on it at the rate ordered as above, excluding 1047 days of delay occurred in filing the appeal on hand, within two months from the date on which a certified copy of this judgment is received. The disbursal of the amount in favour of the petitioner shall be in accordance with the directions issued by this Court in Circular No.03/2019 dated 06.09.2019.

¶50

M.A.C.A stands allowed accordingly.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

MARY JOSEPH JUDGE

¶53

NAB

Rayees v. Anil Kumar T.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rayees v. Anil Kumar T.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu Vs National Insurance Company Limited

Abdu Rahman Thacharakkavil Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd, Represented by Its Branchmanager

Sivadasan P.P. Vs United India Insurance Company Ltd.

M.M. Soman, Vs K.R. Abdul Manaf

Vineeth Vs Mathayi

The Branch Manager Vs Velayudhan T.K