Kerala High Court
Vijayan Nair S vs The Divisional Manager on 10 April, 2026
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1948
MACA NO. 694 OF 2015
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 07.10.2014 IN OPMV NO.266 OF
2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
THIRUVALLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER,
REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH, KOCHI - 18.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.)
SMT.K.S.SANTHI
RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANTS:
1 VIJAYAN NAIR.S
S/O. SANKARA PILLAI, GEETHA BHAVANAM,
ELAVUMTHITTA P.O., KOZHENCHERRY - 689 503.
2 GEETHA R. NAIR
W/O. VIJAYAN NAIR S, GEETHA BHAVANAM,
ELAVUMTHITTA P.O., KOZHENCHERRY - 689 503.
3 SOORAJ V. NAIR
S/O. VIJAYAN NAIR S., GEETHABHAVANANAM,
ELAVUMTHITTA P.O., KOZHENCHERRY - 689 503.
BY ADVS.
SMT.ANNIE M.ABRAHAM
SRI.T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA)
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
2
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 10.04.2026, ALONG WITH MACA.1639/2015,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1948
MACA NO. 1639 OF 2015
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 07.10.2014 IN OPMV NO.266 OF
2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PATHANAMTHITTA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN THE O.P(M.V):
1 VIJAYAN NAIR S.,
AGED 58 YEARS, S/O SANKARAN PILLAI, GEETHA
BHAVANAM, ELAVUMTHITTA P.O, KOZHENCHERRY,
PATHANAMTHITTA
2 GEETHA R. NAIR
AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.VIJAYAN NAIR, GEETHA
BHAVANAM, ELAVUMTHITTA P.O, KOZHENCHERRY,
PATHANAMTHITTA
3 SOORAJ V. NAIR
AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O.VIJAYAN NAIR.S, GEETHA BHAVANAM,
ELAVUMTHITTA P.O, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA)
SMT.ANNIE M.ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE O.P(M.V):
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL
OFFICE, THIRUVALLA PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-
689 647
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
4
BY ADV SHRI.A.R.GEORGE
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 10.04.2026, ALONG WITH
MACA.694/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
5
JUDGMENT
These two appeals have been preferred from the very same award passed in OP(MV)No.266/2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta.
2. M.A.C.A. 1639 of 2015 has been preferred by the claimants challenging the quantum of compensation on the ground that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is meager and inadequate whereas M.A.C.A. 694 of 2015 has been preferred by the insurance company on the ground that the amounts awarded under various heads are exorbitant.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in this appeal as claimants and respondents as in the O.P.
4. The claimants are the parents and brother of deceased Sujith V. Nair. They filed OP(MV).No.266/2008 claiming compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act on the ground that on 31.12.2007 at 10.15 a.m., while the victim was riding a bike bearing registration No.KL 3 P 8784, a stage carrier bearing registration No.KL 3 M 6940 driven by R1 hit on the motorcycle and in the accident the victim sustained grievous injuries and he succumbed to the injuries. Accident MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 6 occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of R1, who was the driver of the stage carrier. R2 is the RC owner of the stage carrier and R3 is the insurer. R1 to R3 are liable to pay the compensation.
5. Before the Tribunal, R1 and R2 remained absent and they were set ex parte.
6. R3 filed written statement stating that the accident occurred not due to the negligence of the 1 st respondent, but it was due to the negligence of the deceased himself. Existence of the valid insurance policy is admitted by the insurer. But it was contended that there was violation of policy conditions and therefore insurance company is entitled to recover the amount from the RC owner after payment of the award amount. It was also contended that the amount claimed under various heads are exorbitant.
7. After trial, the learned Tribunal passed an award for Rs.20,40,000/- with 9% interest per annum and cost.
8. The point for consideration is whether the award passed by the Tribunal needs any interference by this Court.
9. Admittedly, on 31.12.2007 at 10.15 a.m while the MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 7 victim was riding a motor vehicle, a stage carriage bearing Registration No.KL 3 M 6940 driven by R1 hit on the motorcycle causing fatal injuries to the victim and victim succumbed to the injuries. It is in evidence that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the stage carriage by R1.
10. The Tribunal took his notional income as Rs.12,000/-. The learned counsel for the claimants contended that the notional income of Rs.12,000/- taken by the Tribunal is very low. He contended that Tribunal ought to have taken the income at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month. He placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Nanu K v. National Insurance Company Limited reported in 2024 KHC 7373, wherein the notional income of a final year engineering student, who died in an accident in the year 2015 was taken as ₹22,000/- for the purpose of calculating the loss of dependency.
11. Victim was aged 20 at the time of accident and according to the claimants, he was 5th semester B Tech student of Sree Buddha College of Engineering College, Pattoor. To substantiate the same, the claimants have produced Ext.A8 MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 8 certificate. The records would reveal that he was an Engineering student who had a bright future.
12. Having regard to the fact that victim was the 5 th semester engineering student with a bright future, his notional income is taken as ₹16,000/- per month for the purpose of assessing compensation.
13. The victim was aged 20 years at the time of accident. Therefore, 40% of the income is to be added towards future prospects (National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. If 40% is thus added to the notional monthly income of ₹16,000/-, the income would come to ₹22,400/- (₹16,000 +₹6,400). He was a bachelor. Therefore, 50% of his monthly income is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses (Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another (2009(6)SCC 121). Hence, after such deduction, his monthly contribution to the family would be ₹11,200/-. Since the victim was aged 20, the multiplier applicable to him is 18. Accordingly, under the head loss of dependency, claimants are entitled to get an amount of ₹24,19,200/- (₹11,200x12x18).
14. Under the head funeral expenses, the Tribunal has MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 9 paid an amount of ₹25,000/-. In view of the guidelines of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case (cited supra) claimants are entitled to only ₹15,000/- under the said head with 10% increase in every three years. Hence claimants are entitled to ₹18,150/- under the said head instead of ₹25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
15. It is in evidence that the accident occurred on 31.12.2007 and the victim who sustained injuries and died on the same day. Accordingly, the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head pain and suffering is to be deducted.
16. The Tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹50,000/- under the head loss of love and affection. In New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Somwati [2020(9) SCC 644] the Hon'ble Apex Court held that loss of love and affection is comprehended in loss of consortium and therefore there is no justification to award compensation towards loss of love and affection as a separate head. Therefore, the claimants are not entitled to any amount under the head loss of love and affection as a separate head. Instead, as per the guidelines of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case, the claimants 1 & 2 are MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 10 entitled to consortium of ₹40,000/- with 10% increase in every three years. The accident was on 31.12.2007, the award of the Tribunal was passed on 07.10.2014. Therefore, the claimants 1 & 2 are entitled to get ₹48,400/- each towards consortium. Thus under the head loss of consortium an amount of ₹96,800/- (48,400x2) is awarded.
17. Under the head loss of estate, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of ₹10,000/-. In view of the guidelines of the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case (cited supra) claimants are entitled to ₹15,000/- under the said head with 10% increase in every three years. Thus claimants are entitled to only ₹18,150/- under the said head as against ₹10,000/-.
18. The amount of compensation recalculated are as follows:
Sl. Head of Claim Amount Total amount
No. awarded by after
the Tribunal enhancement
in appeal
1 Loss of dependency 19,44,000/- 24,19,200/-
2 Partial loss of earnings ---- ----
3 Transport to hospital 5,000/- 5,000/-
4 Extra nourishment ---- ----
5 Bystander's expenses ---- ----
MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015
2026:KER:32837
11
6 Damage to clothes 1,000/- 1,000/-
7 Medical expenses ---- ----
8 Funeral expenses 25,000/- 18,150/-
9 Pain and sufferings 5,000/- ----
10 Loss of love and affection 50,000/- ----
11 Loss of consortium ---- 96,800/-
12 Loss of estate 10,000/- 18,150/-
13 Loss of amenities ---- ----
14 others ---- ----
Total 20,40,000/- 25,58,300/-
Amount enhanced is ₹5,18,300/- (25,58,300 - 20,40,000)
19. In the light of the findings rendered above, the contentions raised by the Insurance company that the amount awarded by the Tribunal are exorbitant and excessive is devoid of any merit and accordingly, the said contention is liable to be rejected and there is no merit in the appeal filed by the insurance company.
20. In view of the above findings, MACA No.694 of 2015 filed by the insurance company stands dismissed. No cost.
21. MACA.No.1639 of 2015 filed by the claimants stands allowed with costs.
22. R3 insurance company shall deposit the award amount as enhanced by this Court with 9% interest in the MACA Nos.694&1639 of 2015 2026:KER:32837 12 Bank Account of the claimant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after deducting the deposit if any already made. Since there was a delay of 52 days in filing the appeal, the claimants will not be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount for the period of 52 days as directed in C.M.Appl.No.1802/2015 in M.A.C.A. No.1639/2015.
23. The apportionment of the award amount shall be as ordered by the Tribunal.
The claimants shall produce the details of the bank account before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Pathanamthitta, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
M.B.SNEHALATHA, JUDGE Mms