Anila Sony and others v. Palanivelu K. and Others

``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS MONDAY, THE 8 [ TH ] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1946 MACA NO. 897 OF 2010 ``` ``` AGAINST THE AWARD DATED 14.08.2009 IN OP(MV) NO.1080 OF 2005 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA ``` ## **`APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:`** ## **`1 ANILA SONY,`** ``` AGED 29 YEARS, ``` ``` W/O. SONY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (L.V. KAMBIYIL), ASRAMAM WARD, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA. ``` - **`2 SONU,`** ``` AGED 8 YEARS ``` ``` (MINOR), S/O. LATE SONY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (L.V. KAMBIYIL), ASRAMAM WARD, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ANILA SONY. ``` - **`3 SANU,`** ``` AGED 6 YEARS ``` ``` (MINOR), S/O. LATE SONY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (L.V. KAMBIYIL), ASRAMAM WARD, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ANILA SONY,. ``` ## **`*4 ANNAMMA JOSEPH (DIED)`** ``` S/O. LATE SONY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (L.V. KAMBIYIL), ASRAMAM WARD, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA. ``` ## **`5 ANTONY ANTONY`** ``` (MINOR), S/O. LATE SONY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (L.V. KAMBIYIL), ASRAMAM WARD, AVALOOKKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ANILA SONY. ``` ``` BY ADV B.PRAMOD ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:`** ## **`1 PALANIVELU K.,`** - **`AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. KARUPPANNAN, DOOR NO.69, KAMARAJ NAGAR, NEAR OMALLUR P.S., LIMIT DALMIA COMPANY, KARAPPUR P.O., SALEM, TAMILNADU.`** MACA 897 of 2010 2 - **`2 S. VIJAYA, W/O. SELVARAJ, 11/IF THERKKU AMMAPET SALEM.`** ``` 3 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SALEM NAL ROAD. ``` ``` * ADDL R4 TO R8 ARE IMPLEADED ``` ``` 4 SHIBU JOSEPH, THOPPIL (H) MANGALAM, KANJIRAMCHIRA P. O., ALAPPUZHA - 688 007. ``` ``` 5 SUNNY JOSEPH, THOPPIL (H) MANGALAM, KANJIRAMCHIRA P. O., ALAPPUZHA - 688 007. ``` ``` 6 JAINAMMA BABU, THEKKETHARAKKAL, KATTOOR P. O., KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA - 688 522. ``` ``` 7 BICHU, S/O. JAMES JOSEPH, VALIYAVEEDU, PALACHIRA COLONY, KATTOOR P. O, KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA - 688 522. ``` - **`8 JITHA`** ``` D/O. JAMES JOSEPH, VALIYAVEEDU, PALACHIRA COLONY, KATTOOR P. O, KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA - 688 522 ``` ``` *(LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED 4TH APPELLANT ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 8, AS PER THE ORDER DATED 26/03/2024 IN IA.NO.1/2024 IN MACA 897/2010) ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.), SC, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. SRI.ALEXY AUGUSTINE SRI.GEORGE A.CHERIAN SRI.S.K. SAJI ``` ``` THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` MACA 897 of 2010 3 ## **J U D G M E N T** This appeal is filed by the legal heirs of deceased Sony Joseph, who died in a road traffic accident occurred on 01.05.2005, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. On 01.05.2005, at about 4.30 a.m., while deceased Sony Joseph was riding a bicycle through Alappuzha - Ernakulam National Highway at Thumpoly, TN-30/9145 lorry driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner knocked him down, and he sustained fatal injuries and died at Medical College Hospital, Alappuzha. His legal heirs approached the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.11,50,000/-. But the Tribunal awarded only Rs.4,70,000/-. Hence this appeal. 3. As per judgment dated 13.02.2023, this Court allowed the appeal granting enhancement compensation to the appellants. But on finding that the 4th appellant-mother was no more when the appeal was disposed of, the appellants filed R.P.No.214 of 2024 and it was allowed recalling judgment MACA 897 of 2010 4 dated 13.02.2023. Thereafter, the legal heirs of deceased 4th appellant were impleaded as additional respondents 4 to 8. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurer and learned counsel for additional respondents 4 to 8. 5. The appellants were assailing the impugned award on the ground of inadequacy of compensation. According to them, the notional income taken by the Tribunal @ Rs.3,000/- per month was on the lower side. Going by the decision **Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited [AIR 2011 SC 2951]** , he was eligible to get his notional income fixed @ Rs.5,000/- per month. But considering his skilled work as a weaver, his notional income could be taken as Rs.6,000/- per month. Since he was only 29 years of age, 40% addition can be given to his future prospects, relying on the decision **National Insurance Company Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi and Others, [(2017) 16 SCC 680]** . So, his monthly income would become Rs.8,400/-. MACA 897 of 2010 5 On deducting ¼ towards his personal expenses, the income for computing compensation for loss of dependency can be taken as Rs.6,300/-. The multiplier applicable is 17, as he was aged only 29. So the compensation for loss of dependency could be assessed as Rs.12,85,200/- (6,300x17x12). After deducting the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency, i.e., Rs.4,32,000/-, the balance entitled is Rs.8,53,200/-. 6. Towards loss of consortium, relying on **Pranay Sethi’s** case cited supra, the dependents of the deceased are entitled to get Rs.40,000/- each, which will come to Rs.2,00,000/-. After deducting the amount already awarded by the Tribunal, i.e., Rs.27,000/-, the appellants are entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.1,73,000/-. 7. For funeral expenses, the appellants are entitled to get Rs.15,000/-, instead of Rs.3,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, based on **Pranay Sethi’s** case cited supra. So they are entitled to get the balance amount of Rs.12,000/-. MACA 897 of 2010 6 8. Towards loss of estate, no amount was awarded by the Tribunal. Based on **Pranay Sethi’s** case cited supra, they are entitled to get Rs.15,000/-. 9. Since it is a death case, the legal heirs of the deceased are not entitled to get compensation for pain and suffering of the deceased, based on **Sarla Verma and Others** _**v.**_ **Delhi Transport Corporation and Another [2009 KHC 4634]** , Rs.5,000/- awarded under that head is liable to be deducted. 10. The compensation awarded under all other heads seems to be reasonable and hence it needs no modification. |Head of claim|Amount<br>awarded by<br>the Tribunal|Amount<br>awarded in<br>appeal|Amounts<br>deducted<br>in appeal|Difference to be<br>drawn as<br>enhanced<br>compensation| |---|---|---|---|---| |Compensation<br>for loss of<br>dependency|Rs.4,32,000/-|Rs.12,85,200/-||Rs.8,53,200/-| |Loss of love and<br>affection / Loss<br>of consortium|Rs.27,000/-|Rs.2,00,000/-||Rs.1,73,000/-| |Funeral<br>expenses|Rs.3,000/-|Rs.15,000/-||Rs.12,000/-| MACA 897 of 2010 7 |Loss of estate|…..|Rs.15,000/-||Rs.15,000/-| |---|---|---|---|---| |Compensation<br>for pain and<br>suffering|Rs.5,000/-|…..|Rs.5,000/-|| |Total|||Rs.5,000/-|Rs.10,53,200/-| |Enhanced compensation is Rs.**10,48,200/-**(10,53,200 - 5,000)||||| |||||| 11. So the appellants and additional respondents 4 to 8 are entitled to get enhanced compensation of Rs.10,48,200/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. 12. The 4th appellant-Annamma Joseph passed away pending appeal. Her legal heirs were impleaded as additional respondents 4 to 8. Appellants 2, 3 and 5 are the children of her predeceased son Sony Joseph, and additional respondents 7 and 8 are the children of another son, who predeceased her. From the enhanced compensation, Rs.1,25,000/- is set apart to the share of 4th appellant, which will be shared by appellants 2, 3, 5 and additional respondents 4 to 8. Appellants 2, 3 and 5 together will get Rs.25,000/- and additional MACA 897 of 2010 8 respondents 7 and 8 together will get Rs.25,000/- and additional respondents 4, 5 and 6 will take Rs.25,000/- each. The balance amount and the interest will be shared equally between appellants 1 to 3 and 5. 13. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent-Insurer submitted that the entire compensation along with interest has been deposited by them before the Tribunal on 11.08.2023. Learned Tribunal shall disburse that amount to the appellants and additional respondents 4 to 8 as stated above, after deducting the liabilities, if any of the appellants and additional respondents 4 to 8 towards tax, balance court fee and legal benefit fund. The appeal is allowed to the extent as above with proportionate costs. Sd/- **SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE** DSV/- MACA 897 of 2010 9 ## **`APPENDIX OF MACA 897/2010`** ## **`PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES :`** ``` Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 25.05.2023 OF THE 4TH APPELLANT I.E., ANNAMMA JOSEPH ISSUED FROM THE ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : NIL`**