Motor accident death claim under Section 163A MV Act. The Tribunal's award used the wrong computation method. The High Court applied the second schedule structured formula for a 23-year-old earning Rs.3,000 monthly and enhanced compensation by Rs.1,98,000.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 16TH MAGHA, 1945
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPMV 243/2010 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL PALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONERS:
1VARGHESE
S/O.PATHROSE, MAZHUVANCHERIL HOUSE,
PIRAVOM KARA, PIRAVOM VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2 KUNJAMMA VARGHESE W/O.VARGHESE, MAZHUVANCHERIL HOUSE, PIRAVOM KARA, PIRAVOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.3MANJU
D/O.VARGHESE, MAZHUVANCHERIL HOUSE,
PIRAVOM KARA, PIRAVOM VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM (NILACKAPPILLIL)
SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
CHERUPUSHPAM BUILDING, PALA,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686575.
2 JOSES/O.KUNJAVARA, PANGOTTIL HOUSE,
PALACHUVADU P.O., PIRAVOM,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-686664.
3 BETTYW/O.JOSE, PANGOTTIL HOUSE,
PALACHUVADU P.O., PIRAVOM,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-686664.
BY ADV SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
..2..
J U D G M E N T
The appellants are the petitioners in O.P.(MV)No.243 of 2010 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala.
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
..3..
respondent. Therefore, no liability can be fastened upon; they also disputed the quantum of compensation as well.
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
..4..
reasonable or not. The learned counsel for the appellants points out that, while assessing the compensation, the Tribunal took the multiplier applicable to the age of the parents and made a deduction of 50% towards future prospects as well. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, such a method of computation was not permissible as the application was submitted under Section 163A of the M.V Act. The said contention has to be accepted as it is in tune with the statutory stipulations contained in Section 163A of the M.V Act. The said provision deals with a separate procedure for assessing the compensation strictly in tune with the structured formula contemplated under the second schedule of the M.V. Act as it stood prior to the amendment of the Act in the year 2018. As per the same, a separate method of computation has been contemplated, and no deviation from the same is permitted. As far as the deduction of 50% towards personal expenses and the application of multipliers applicable to the parents, etc. cannot be applied while assessing the compensation under Section
..5..
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
163A of the M.V Act. The proper method is to accept the figure shown in the second schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, for the age group to which the person belongs and also the annual income that he was receiving at the time of the accident. Thereafter,1 /3 of the said amount has to be deducted towards personal expenses. In this case, the deceased was aged 23 years at the time of the accident and was earning an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month. As far as the monthly income is concerned, the same was accepted by the Tribunal as well. In such circumstances, his annual income was Rs.36,000/- and the amount shown in the second schedule for the person talling in that category and aged 23 years, is Rs.6,48,000/-. After deducting1 /3 of the said amount towards personal expenses, the actual amount receivable by the appellants would come to Rs.4,32,000/- .
..6..
MACA NO. 1385 OF 2013
loss of estate. Thus, the total compensation receivable by the appellants under Section 163A of the M.V Act would come to Rs.4,36,500/-. The amount already awarded by the Tribunal is Rs.2,38,500/- and the additional compensation would come to Rs.1,98,000/- (Rs.4,36,500-2,38,500).
In the result, this appeal is allowed, and the award dated 22.01.2013 in OP(MV)No.243 of 2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala is hereby modified by granting an additional compensation of Rs.1,98,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Ninety Eight thousand only) and the said amount shall be deposited by the 2nd respondent with interest at the rate as ordered by the Tribunal and proportionate costs, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A,
JUDGE
LU
1 issue framed by the court
Whether compensation awarded under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, computed with multipliers applicable to parents' age and 50% deduction, was reasonable or required recomputation under the se
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Varghese
Kunjamma Varghese
Manju
National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Jose
Betty
Ziyad Rahman A.A.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court