Kerala High Court
United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Vimala K.V on 5 February, 2010
Author: C.T.Ravikumar
Bench: C.T.Ravikumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2016/17TH ASHADHA, 1938
MACA.No. 18 of 2011 ( )
------------------------
AGAINST THE AWARD IN OP(MV) 102/2008 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
VATAKARA DATED 05-02-2010
APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT:
---------------------------
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE, VETTUKATTIL BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI-682016.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH
RESPONDENT(S)/CLAIMANTS 1 TO 4 AND R1 & 2:
------------------------------------------
1. VIMALA K.V., AGED 39 YEARS,
W/O.KRISHNAN, KAKKARAYIL HOUSE, IRINGAL AMSOM AND DESOM, POST
IRINGAL, KOYILANDY TALUK, PIN 673521.
2. VIJINA K.V., AGED 27 YEARS,
D/O.KRISHNAN- DO-
3. SAJINA K.V., AGED 22 YEARS,
D/O.KRISHNAN -DO-
4. HARIKRISHNAN K.V., AGED 21 YEARS,
S/O.KRISHNAN -DO-
R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SMT.K.V.RESHMI
THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
shg/
C.T. RAVIKUMAR & K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH, JJ.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
M.A.C.A.No.18 of 2011
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 8th day of July, 2016
J U D G M E N T
K.P. Jyothindranath, J.
This appeal is preferred by the United India Insurance Company Limited against the award dated 5.2.2010 made in O.P.(M.V.) No.102/2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vatakara.
2. When the appeal came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted before us that a motor vehicle accident occurred on 18.10.2007 at about 6 p.m. at Melekolagappara on Bathery - Kalpetta Public Road. It was a collision of two mini lorries bearing registration Nos.KL- 11-P-6365 and KL-12-C-6148. Deceased Krishnan was driving the mini lorry bearing registration No.KL-11-P-6365. The claimants are the wife and children of the said Krishnan. It was alleged that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the other vehicle bearing registration No.KL-12-C-6148. The Tribunal assessed a total compensation of Rs.7,10,000/-. It is the submission that the Tribunal erred in its finding in respect of the M.A.C.A.No.18 of 2011 2 negligence aspect as well as the quantum.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants/respondents submitted before us that here is a case where the police charge sheeted the driver of the vehicle insured with the appellant herein. The said charge is marked as Ext.A2. No evidence adduced by the appellant/respondent. Prima facie it is proved that the negligence is on the side of the driver of the vehicle which was insured with the appellant. It is also the submission that the compensation assessed is only a just compensation. It can be seen that towards loss of consortium only a sum of Rs.10,000/- was granted.
4. We have perused the award. It can be seen that the police filed final report against the driver of the vehicle bearing No.KL-12-C-6148. The Charge is marked as Ext.A2. The burden of the claimants is seen discharged by the production of Police Charge. No evidence was adduced by the respondents before the Tribunal to show that there was any negligence on the side of the deceased. Under such circumstances, we feel that no illegality committed by the M.A.C.A.No.18 of 2011 3 Tribunal in its finding that the negligence of the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal caused the accident.
5. The next point to be considered is whether the quantum of compensation awarded is exorbitant.
6. After perusing the award, it can be seen that a sum of Rs.5,000/- is considered as the income of the deceased. It can be further seen that he was a driver by profession and the accident occurred in the year 2007. More over, Rs.7,10,000/- seems to be a just compensation. After going through the compensation awarded on various heads, we feel that there is nothing to interfere with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, this appeal dismissed.
The appellant Insurance Company is directed to pay the balance amount as per the award immediately.
Sd/-
C.T. RAVIKUMAR JUDGE Sd/-
K.P. JYOTHINDRANATH JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/