Partly allowed

Mathew S/O.Joseph v. Ali Kunju

Kerala HC4 Dec 2023MACA/890/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench considered an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award fixing compensation at Rs.31,700 for injuries sustained in a road accident. Finding the award low for pain and suffering and loss of amenities, the Court enhanced the compensation by Rs.14,800 but denied interest on the delayed period.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs.14,800 granted subject to denial of interest for the period of delay caused by default.

Mathew S/O.Joseph Vs Ali Kunju — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

MONDAY,THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶5

MACA NO. 890 OF 2006

¶6

OPMV 618/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,

¶7

MUVATTUPUZHA

¶8

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶9

MATHEW S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT THEKKANAL HOUSE,, THRIPPUNITHURA
P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 K.N. ALI KUNJU, S/O. FATHIMA, KUMBALAPPILLIL HOUSE, VENDUVAZHY P.O.,, KOTHAMANGALAM.

¶12

2 M.A.MRIDULAN SO.M.K.ASOKAN SREE VALSAM, VEERUMPADATHU HOUSE,, THYKOODAM, VYTTILA.

¶13

3 THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD. M.G.ROAD, KOCHI.

¶14

BY ADV SRI.N.S.MOHAMMED USMAN

¶15

THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

M.A.C.A. No.890/2006

: 2 :

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the petitioner in OP(MV) No.618/2002 on the files of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha.

¶20

The said claim petition was submitted by him seeking compensation for the injuries sustained to him in a motor accident that occurred on 13.01.2002. The accident occurred, when the motorcycle ridden by the appellant was hit by another motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-07/V-7037 ridden by the 1^st respondent in a rash and negligent manner. The 2^nd respondent was the owner of the said vehicle and the 3^rd respondent was its insurer. According to him, he was working in Canara Bank with a monthly income of Rs.8,562/- and he sustained injuries in the accident. The claim petition was submitted in such circumstances.

¶21

The 3^rd respondent alone contested the matter by filing a written statement, wherein they admitted the coverage of policy for the motorcycle ridden by the 1^st respondent. However, they disputed the negligence as well as the quantum of compensation.

¶22

The evidence in this case consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A12 from the side of the appellant. No

¶23

M.A.C.A. No.890/2006

¶24

: 3 :

¶25

evidence was adduced by the respondents.

¶26

After the trial, the tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of the 1^st respondent in riding the motorcycle and being the insurer, the 3^rd respondent was held liable to pay the compensation. The quantum of compensation was fixed at Rs.31,700/- and the same was directed to be deposited by the 3^rd respondent insurance company with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. This appeal is submitted in such circumstances seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶27

Heard Sri. A.N. Santhosh, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. N.S. Mohammed Usman, the learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent insurance company.

¶28

Even though the learned counsel for the appellant raised various contentions with regard to the inadequacy of amounts awarded under various heads, after perusal of the records, I find most of the heads on which the amount awarded are reasonable in nature. It is to be noted in this regard that, the appellant did not sustain any physical disablement and the injuries

¶29

M.A.C.A. No.890/2006

¶30

: 4 :

¶31

sustained were also not very serious as well. However, it is evident that, he had undergone inpatient for a period of 8 days, but no amount was awarded towards bystander expenses. Considering the date of accident, I deem it appropriate to grant an amount of Rs.800/- under the said head.

¶32

On moving to the other heads, it can be seen that amount awarded by the tribunal towards pain and suffering is Rs.8000/- which appears to be on the lower side considering the nature of injuries sustained to him. Therefore, I am inclined to grant a further sum of Rs.7000/- under the said head. Similarly, considering the nature of injuries and the other difficulties which he may have to face, a further amount of Rs.7000/- is awarded under the head of loss of amenities as well.

¶33

Thus, the total additional compensation is determined as Rs.14,800/-(Rupees fourteen thousand and eight hundred only) [800+7000+7000] and the 3^rd respondent is directed to deposit the said amount along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and with proportionate costs. The said amount shall be deposited within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

M.A.C.A. No.890/2006

¶35

: 5 :

¶36

However, it is clarified that, earlier, the MACA was dismissed

¶37

for default and the application to restore the same was filed with a petition to condone the delay of 2930 days. The said delay was condoned by this Court on the specific condition that, in case any amount is awarded, the appellant shall not be entitled to interest for the said period. Therefore, it is ordered that the appellant shall not be entitled to interest for the additional amount granted pertaining to the period of delay as referred to above.

¶38

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

¶39

ncd/

Mathew S/O.Joseph v. Ali Kunju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew S/O.Joseph v. Ali Kunju

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

Sajeev Vs Raju

Sakkeer Hussain Vs E.M.John

Velayudhan [Died] Vs B.Balasubramanian

Rethnamma Vasudevan Vs Abdul Salam

Sandeep Vs Binumon

Jayakumar Vs Murugan