Kerala High Court
Rajan.A.A vs Jaleel.P.K on 21 August, 2025
M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
1
2025:KER:63690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1947
MACA NO. 743 OF 2020
AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 16.03.2016 IN OP(MV) NO.2591/2008
ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR.
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:
1 RAJAN.A.A
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAPPU, RESIDING AT ARIPPINNI (H),
P.O. VALAPPAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 567.
2 JAYA RAJAN
AGED 51 YEARS,
W/O. RAJAN, RESIDING AT ARIPPINNI (H),
P.O. VALAPPAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 567.
3 AADITHYA (MINOR)
AGED 15 YEARS
D/O. RAJAN, RESIDING AT ARIPPINNI (H),
P.O. VALAPPAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 567.
(THE MINOR 3RD APPELLANT REPRESENTED HEREIN BY
HER GUARDIAN FATHER THE IST APPELLANT).
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
SRI.P.S.APPU
SRI.A.R.NIMOD
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 JALEEL.P.K
MANAGING PARTNER, BEST GRANITES,
KADANGODE, THIPPILLISSERY P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 519.
M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
2
2025:KER:63690
2 SANALKUMAR
S/O. CHANDRAN K.A.,
RESIDING AT KANDAMPULLY (H),
P.O. PERUMBILAVU, KADAVLLUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 519.
3 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
U BROTHERS BUILDING, KUNNAMKULAM P.O.,
PIN-680 503,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
BY ADV SHRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR
HEARING ON 21.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
3
2025:KER:63690
C.S.SUDHA, J.
----------------------------------------------------
M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of August 2025
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) by the claim petitioners in O.P.(MV) No.2591/2008 on the file of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal - IV, Thrissur (the Tribunal), aggrieved by the amount of compensation granted by Award dated 16/03/2016. The respondents herein are the respondents in the petition. In this appeal, the parties and the documents will be referred to as described in the original petition.
2. The claim petitioners are the parents and sister of deceased minor girl, Athira. According to the claim petitioners, on 28/10/2008 at about 05:15 p.m., while the deceased was walking along with her friend through the Kizhakke Tippu Sulthan road at Chooloor and when she reached near Chooloor M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 4 2025:KER:63690 Kinar bus stop, tipper lorry bearing registration no.KL-48/8072 driven by the second respondent in a rash and negligent manner knocked her down, as a result of which she sustained grievous injuries to which she succumbed.
3. The first respondent-owner and the second respondent-driver remained ex-parte.
4. The third respondent-insurer filed written statement admitting the policy but denying negligence on the part of the second respondent. The compensation claimed under various heads was contended to be exorbitant.
5. Before the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced by either side. Exts.A1 to A11 were marked on the side of the claim petitioners. No documentary evidence was produced by the respondents.
6. The Tribunal on consideration of the documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, found negligence on the part of the second respondent driver of the offending vehicle resulting in the incident and hence awarded an M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 5 2025:KER:63690 amount of ₹3,41,500/- together with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the petition till realisation along with proportionate costs. Aggrieved by the Award, the claim petitioners have come up in appeal.
7. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether there is any infirmity in the findings of the Tribunal calling for an interference by this Court.
8. Heard both sides.
9. The award of compensation by the Tribunal under the following head is challenged by the claim petitioners- Notional income It is submitted by the learned counsel for the claim petitioner that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head "loss of prospective service and future income" as ₹2,70,000/- is against the dictum in National Insurance Company v. K.K.Assainar, 2019 (4) KLT 39 as well as the dictums in R.K. Mallik v. Kiran Pal, CDJ 2009 SC 1040 and Meena Pawaia v. Ashraf Ali, 2022 ACJ 528. It is submitted M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 6 2025:KER:63690 that in the light of the dictums of the Apex Court in R.K. Mallik and Meena Pawaia (Supra), the claim petitioners are also entitled to compensation towards loss of future prospects. Per contra, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the third respondent/insurer that in the light of the recent Apex Court decision in Thangavel v. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Civil Appeal No.3595/2024 dated 08/08/2025, no future prospects can be granted. He also refers to the dictum in K.K.Assainar (Supra) where no future prospects was granted.
9.1. In the light of the dictum in K.K.Assainar (Supra), the annual income of the deceased is liable to be fixed at ₹50,000/-. The question whether any amount is required to be added towards future prospects while computing compensation was considered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in K.K.Assainar (Supra) in paragraph nos. 16 and 17 of the judgment. I respectfully concur with the findings of the learned Single Judge on the said aspect and hence I find that future M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 7 2025:KER:63690 prospects cannot be granted. Therefore, the amount to which the claim petitioners are entitled to is ₹5,00,000/-, that is, ₹50,000/- x 15 x 2/3.
Funeral expenses
10. An amount of ₹10,000/- was claimed. The Tribunal granted an amount of ₹10,000/-. However, as per settled precedents, it is ₹15,000/- to which the claim petitioners are entitled to. Therefore, ₹15,000/- is awarded under the head funeral expenses.
Pain and sufferings
11. An amount of ₹15,000/- was claimed. However, no amount is seen granted. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that an amount of ₹15,000/- as claimed can be awarded.
Loss of estate
12. No amount is seen granted by the Tribunal under this head. Therefore, they are entitled to an amount of ₹15,000/-. As no amount had been granted by the Tribunal under M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 8 2025:KER:63690 this head, in the light of the dictum in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, 2017 (5) KHC 350: (2017) 16 SCC 680 (Supra) they are entitled to enhancement of 10% each on the expiry of every three years. Therefore, the claim petitioners are entitled to ₹18,150/- towards loss of estate. [₹15,000/- x 10% = 16,500/-, 16,500/- x 10% = ₹18,150/-]. Loss of love and affection
13. An amount of ₹30,000/- was claimed. The Tribunal granted an amount of ₹60,000/- under this head. Admittedly, the claim petitioners are the parents and sibling of the deceased. Therefore, going by the dictums in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram, (2018) 18 SCC 130: 2018 KHC 6697, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur, AIR 2020 SC 3076:
2023 KHC 760 and New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Somwati, 2020 KHC 6530 : (2020) 9 SCC 644, the parents are entitled to an amount of ₹40,000/- each towards loss of filial consortium. It is well settled that when compensation is awarded under the head M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020 9 2025:KER:63690 loss of love and affection, no further amount can be granted for loss of consortium. However, the third claim petitioner is the sibling, to whom an amount of ₹40,000/- towards loss of love and affection can be granted. Therefore, the claim petitioners are entitled to an amount of ₹1,20,000/- under this head. An amount of ₹60,000/- has already been granted by the tribunal. Hence they are entitled to the balance amount of ₹60,000/-.
14. The impugned Award is modified to the following extent:
Sl. Head of claim Amount Amount Modified in No. claimed Awarded by appeal Tribunal (in ₹) (in ₹) (in ₹)
1. Transport to 2,000/- 1,000/- 1,000/-
hospital (No modification)
2. Damage to 500/- 500/- 500/-
clothings (No modification)
3. Funeral 10,000/- 10,000/- 15,000/-
expenses (10,000/- +
5,000/-)
4. Pain and 15,000/- Nil 15,000/-
sufferings
M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
10
2025:KER:63690
5. Compensation for 2,50,000/- 2,70,000/- 5,00,000/-
loss of (50,000/- x 15 x
prospective 2/3)
service and future
income
6. Loss of love and 30,000/- 60,000/- 1,20,000/-
affection (60,000/- +
60,000/-)
7. Loss of estate 25,000/- Nil 18,150/-
Total 3,32,500/- 3,41,500/- 6,69,650/-
In the result, the appeal is allowed by enhancing the compensation by a further amount of ₹3,28,150/- (total compensation = ₹6,69,650/- that is, ₹3,41,500/- granted by the Tribunal + ₹3,28,150/- granted in appeal) with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization (excluding the period of 1251 days delay in filing the appeal) and proportionate costs. The third respondent/insurer is directed to deposit the aforesaid amount before the Tribunal within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. On deposit of the amount, the Tribunal shall disburse the amount to the claim petitioners at the earliest in accordance with law after making deductions, if any.M.A.C.A.No.743 of 2020
11
2025:KER:63690 Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA JUDGE Jms