Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 25TH MAGHA, 1946 MACA NO. 1189 OF 2014 AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 21.01.2014 IN OPMV NO.290 OF 2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,PUNALUR APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN OPMV
1 CHAN BABU.H, AGED 53 YEARS PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,FROM S.C.B BHAVAN, MUSAVARIKKUNNU, PUNALUR, NOW RESIDING AT PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2 ARIFUNNISA S. @ SHAMMI, AGED 47 YEARS, PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,FROM S.C.B BHAVAN, MUSAVARIKKUNNU, PUNALUR, NOW RESIDING AT PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT 3 SHAMINI BABU, AGED 22 YEARS, D/O. CHAN BABU, PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,FROM S.C.B BHAVAN, MUSAVARIKKUNNU, PUNALUR, NOW RESIDING AT PPM QUARTERS, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT
BY ADVS. SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR SMT.V.BEENA SRI.SUNIL J.CHAKKALACKAL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN OPMV 1 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 SURESH, S/O. KUTTAPPAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, NEAR GOVERNMENT L.P.S, VENDAR,PUTHUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV ALEX ANTONY SEBASTIAN -SC THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 14th day of February, 2025 The petitioner in O.P.(M.V.) No.290/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Punalur is the appellant herein. (For the purpose of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal).
2. The O.P. was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, by the parents and minor sibling of the deceased by name Sharukh Baby, who died in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 16.5.2008. According to them, on 16.5.2008, at about 1 p.m. while the deceased was riding pillion on a motorcycle through Kottarakkara- Punalur public road, a KSRTC bus bearing Registration No. KL-15/4552 driven by the 2 nd respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the motorcycle and as a result of which he fell down and sustained serious injries and he succumbed to the injuies on the same day.
3. The 1st respondent is the owner and the 2nd respondent is the driver of the offending vehicle. According to the petitioners, the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle. The quantum of compensation claimed in the O.P. was Rs.6,50,000/-.
4. The 1st respondent filed a written statement, admitting the accident, but disputing the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle.
5. The evidence in the case consists of documentary evidence Exts.A1 to A10. No evidence was adduced by the respondents.
6. After evaluating the evidence on record, the Tribunal found negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,54,940/- and directed the 1 st respondent to pay the same.
7. The deceased was aged 14 on the date of the accident and he was
a 9th standard student, The Tribunal has taken his notional income at 2,000/- and 1/3 of the same was directed towards personal and living expenses and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,39,940/-.
8. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioners preferred this appeal.
9. Now the point that arises for consideration is the following: Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
10. Heard Sri.R. Suraj Kumar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners/appellants, and Sri. Alex Antony Sebastian, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent.
11. The Point: One of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for
the petitioners is regarding the notional income of the deceased as fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.2,000, is on the lower side. In the decision in National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Assainar [2019 (4) KLT 39], a Single Bench
of this Court, after analysing various decisions of the Apex Court, formulated a schedule for calculating the compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased children betweent the age group 6-15. As per the above schedule, the compensation payable to victims of road traffic accident during the year 2008-2009 in the age group 6-15 is, Rs.5,00,000/-. Along with the same, the petitioners are entitled to get compensation on the conventional heads like loss of estate, funeral expenses and loss of consortium. In the light of the decision in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680], the appellants are entitled to get a consolidated sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, and each dependent is entitled to get a sum of Rs.40,000/-
each towards loss of consortium, with an increase of 10% in every three years. Therefore, towards loss of estate and funeral expense they are entitled to get a sum of Rs.18,150/- each. Towards loss of consortium, petitioners together are entitled to get a sum of Rs. 96,800/- (48,400 x 2).
12. Towards the head ‘Transport to hospital’, a sum of Rs.2,000 can be awarded.
13. No change is required, in the amounts awarded on other heads, as the compensation awarded on those heads appears to be just and reasonable.
14. Therefore, the petitioners/appellants are entitled to get a total compensation of Rs.6,35,100/-, as modified and recalculated above and given in the table below, for easy reference: Sl.
No. Head of Claim Amount Awarded in Appeal (in Rs.)
1 Compensation payable to age group 6-15 5,00,000/-
2 Funeral expenses 18150/-
3 Loss of estate 18,150/-
4 Loss of consortium 96,800/- (48400x2)
5 Transport to hospital 2,000/-
Total 6,35,100/-Enhanced Rs.3,80,160/-
15. In the result, this Appeal is allowed in part, and the 1 st respondent
is directed to deposit a total sum of Rs.6,35,100/- (Rupees Six Lakh Thirty Five Thousand and One Hundred Only), less the amount already deposited, if any, along with interest at the rate ordered by the Tribunal from the date of the petition till realisation/deposit, with proportionate costs, within a period of two months from today. (enhanced compensation will carry interest @8%).
On depositing the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the entire amount to the petitioner, excluding court fee payable, if any, without delay, as per rules. Sd/- C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE sou.